Ruger Single Shot And Ringed Chamber

[joeb33050]

I'm looking for any experiences with ringing the chamber on a a Ruger single shot rifle. It is said that many 45/70 Ruger Single Shot rifles were returned to the factory with ringed barrels.
Help!!
Thanks;
joe brennan

[montana_charlie]

I don't have any experience to share with you, Joe, but have read many posts on the subject. The actual cause of ringed chambers remains (to me) a bit vague, but most agree that it is most common when smokeless powder is used in these roomy cases developed for black powder charges. They go on to say that this type of loading requires the bullet to be firmly into the lands...or heavily crimped in the case...to retard bullet movement until the powder burn is working 'as designed'.

The Ruger, because of what it is and who is most likely to own it, probably sees more smokeless powder, and (short) jacketed bullets, than other designs. That may explain why the number of returns to the factory is so high...if it's true.
I seriously doubt that the Ruger's construction and materials make it more susceptible to this type of damage than any other modern-made rifles.
CM

[Castaway]

Dacron wadding set atop the powder charge is the cause of many ringed chambers. There was an excellent posting over onn Graybeard a couple years ago that talked about synthetic fillers vs. natural fillers such as kapok. The theory was that the poly wads acted like a fluid and the compression had to go someplace, hence the ringed barrel. Cotton was also mentioned as an alternative if I remember correctly. It was well documented. Posting came about the time a friend of mine ringed his High Wall (also 45-70) and he happened to be using fillers in his loads. Some folks swear by them and that's their choice, but I quit just to be on the safe side.

[Char-Gar]

Hoooo-boy... this is going get interesting!

[AZ-Stew]

I ringed the chamber throat in a Remington 700 30-06 about 30 years ago. I was shooting cast and using a Dacron filler. Apparently I was too enthusiastic about pushing the Dacron down on the powder. The ring didn't seem to hurt anything. There were no subsequent extraction or accuracy problems. The ring wasn't very deep, just enough that it bothered me to know that it was there. Sold the rifle about 20 years ago. Not because of the ring. I needed the money at the time. Lesson learned. Now I try to find a powder that will give me the velocity I want, while filling the cartridge as much as possible, without using any fillers. I've never had any ignition problems with loads that occupy over half the case volume.

Regards,

Stew

[35remington]

Well, I gotta say this.

I sure have problems with powder position causing wide swings in velocity. Last example was Oldfeller's Soup Can bullet in a 7-30 Waters using H4895. Found a good accurate load that really required dacron. Without, velocity variations of up to 190 fps showed up.

I gotta agree, those guys that ringed their chambers did something wrong. It doesn't appear to be the same way I'm doing it, which is why I don't have ringed chambers.

[The Double D]

Oh this is gonna start a dog fight.

Charles Dell in his book The Schuetzen Rifle discusses this phenomenon at length. He was even able to purposely ring a barrel from the first shot. Interesting read that book. If you reload you should have the book.

It has to do with the air space left between the cartridge and the bullet.

It's an old phenomenon.

Over powder wads like dacron are used to hold small charges of powder up against the back of the case. But that leaves a big air space between the wad and the bullet base.

Several different theories about what caused the ringing. One theory a pressure wave traveling through the air space impacts the base of the bullet and expands outward, ringing the barrel in area of the chamber of the bottom of the bullet. Or another theory, the air being compressed between the over powder wad and the base of the bullet expands and rings the chamber.

What ever it is it is associated with large cases and reduced loads that leave an air space between bullet and charge and a ring inthe chamer in the are oa the bullet base. It's never associated with loads with full or near full cases.

Last winter while researching the phenomenon for building smokeless powder loads for the 577/450 I came across an old book that discussed the matter. The book warned about using loads using less than 70 % case capacity. I wrote Charles Dell a letter to ask his opinion but he passed away before he could respond.

I believe the book was Phil Sharpes Book on Reloading. Unfortunately for me right now my library is 8,000 miles away so I can't look it up and verify the source.

All I know is that when ever I use reduced loads in large cases I compress as much Kapok in the case as I can over the charge to eliminate as much airspace as possible. It works well with Black and works very well with NfB loads.

[trk]

I've got Phil Sharp's book. I'll look this afternoon.

[MGySgt]

IMHO - The Double D hit it right on the head - What ever filler you use it must be compressed between the powder and the boolit!

I use dacron in my 45/90 and 45/70 loads and use it as a wad in a shot shell. Meaning it gets compressed.

I 'Measure' the amout of air space left in the case after the powder has been put in and make sure the dacron more then fills that space so there is a compression.

I have a dowel on my loading bench that I use to measure this. Mark the dowel for the lenght of the shank that goes in the case and make darn sure that line is above the case when I push/tamp the dacron on top of the powder.

This has taken the same load (velocity) from a 3 in group to MOA (each load was worked with or without the dacron in it) Same velocity loads - dacron always produces tighter groups.

This is with:

45/90's 3031 and 430GR GC
45/70's 3031, 4198, and 2400 with 360 gr (RD) GC and the 430 GR GC.

Bottle neck rounds may be completly different.

The bottom line is NO AIR SPACE left in the case.

These results are my guns:

4 - 45/70s (2 Marlins, 1 Ruger No 1 and a T/C Encore)
2 - 45/90's (one IAB and one Pedersoli Quigley).

Drew

[Bass Ackward]

This is always a hot topic of debate to which I usually responded on one side of the view point. I have mellowed in my old age.

We have to be realistic. Ever time you pull the trigger on a loaded round you are setting off what amounts to a potentially explosive charge where bad things can happen if something goes wrong. So .... you pull that trigger on faith that has been established over centuries by numerical statistics.

If we put chamber ringing from fillers into perspective, then who in the heck cares if something gets rung, unless the owner tries to pass the problem off to someone else?

There is one fly in the ointment for the filler argument for which I have no answer. I shoot powder charges in a lot of different calibers that don't entirely fill the case. Therfore, there is airspace between the powder and the base of the bullet. All of this powder DOES NOT burn inside the case into one even wave. So in essence, the powder acts like a filler would and slams into the base of the bullet. Because that powder has mass. I have, nor has anyone else apparently ringed a chamber using this method that we blame for ringing using filler.

The real problem is that we don't know if chamber ringing is a one time event or if the effects are accumulative over time. I think that it happens over time because it can get worse if continued. So .... if the effects are accumulative, there has to be a begining. How do we identify that point? Again a question that has no answer.

Maybe chamber ringing is a much greater problem than we realize simply because we can't identify the begining. And therefore, someone never knows that they have ringed their chamber until it progresses to identification. At which point we feel we have to blame something. We blame large capacity straight walled cases. Well, it would be easier to visually identify there. And, statistically a lot of these types of guns have the thinest steel barrels making them .... susceptible to the problem. Even if they have heavier steel, it is usually of lower grade, again making it easier to occur there. So is it occurring elsewhere and we just don't see the results?

There are no concrete answers. And since it doesn't happen with powder under the same conditions that we draw comfort in blaming on filler use, those that use filler and speak with confidence, unless you have a method to measure, have to be loading / shooting on faith. As long as you accept the risk, use the filler.

[Bass Ackward]

This has taken the same load (velocity) from a 3 in group to MOA (each load was worked with or without the dacron in it) Same velocity loads - dacron always produces tighter groups.

This is with:

45/90's 3031 and 430GR GC
45/70's 3031, 4198, and 2400 with 360 gr (RD) GC and the 430 GR GC.

Bottle neck rounds may be completly different. Drew

Drew,

Now see my results are the exact opposite. I have used filler to improve crappy loads or to burn stuff I should not be using. But I have never .... in my life ever produced the finest accuracy from any caliber using any type of filler.

Filler .... will .... correct a problem at times for sure. Solid fillers will enable higher velocities with softer mixes for sure. But if no problem with ignition exists, then a fluffy filler always takes accuracy the other way in my experience.

So in essence, a fluffy filler is a good check for reloaders. If you get accuracy improvement from using it, then you are using the wrong powder speed for your application or you have another problem. This is one MAJOR factor why larger diameter bullets work so well for a lot of people. They cure ignition problems as they take time to size down. Or change primer. Improve case neck tension. But find the problem and fix it. If you are using the wrong powder, then why not switch to a correct powder and aviod the ringing risk?

An old timer once told me that a filler is a lazy mans crutch to load development.

[MGySgt]

Drew,

If you are using the wrong powder, then why not switch to a correct powder and aviod the ringing risk?.

Bass,

What is the generally accepted powders for the 45/70? Normally it is IMR 3031 and either H or IMR 4198.

With J bullets I do not use a filler - why? Because there isn't enough powder space anyway. Example
Hornady 350gr FP XTP, WW cases, IMR 3031 - Hornady manual states max is 56.1 - this is a compressed powder charge - no filler needed.

I used this load in 2 different Marlins (one MG and one Ballard) with right around MOA. 1825 FPS from the 18.5 ported GG and 2025 from the 22 in MG.

Ruger #1 had to stop at 51 becasue I had to deep seat them for the short throat in it. Any more and the bullets backed out on their own. Once again MOA.

With Cast - if the powder charge fills the case - no filler (3031 and 400+ grain bullets - Star Line Brass - I run out of powder space before I run out of chamber pressure.

IMR 4198 and a 430GR GC OFP I get 1680 with a filler and MOA, without filler I get 1650 and 3 to 4 in groups.

45/90's

That is a BIG case and to get 1500 - 1550 yo only use about 60% of the case volume.

Without filler (dacron) 4 in, with filler (compressed) MOA and on a real good day when I hold my mouth just right and the planets are aligned I get 1/2 MOA.

I believe - with the testing results I have had - that these powders need at least a slight compression to burn effeciently and produce that type of accuracy.

Once again these are the results I get with my guns and my reloading practices.

Drew

[felix]

If the powder fills the case to the bottom of the boolit, and the powder provides the burn rate for the projectile giving its desired velocity, then you have the safest arrangement for the cartridge. After that, you have to have the gun which can withstand the peak pressure of that cartridge. ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

Without filler (dacron) 4 in, with filler (compressed) MOA and on a real good day when I hold my mouth just right and the planets are aligned I get 1/2 MOA.

Once again these are the results I get with my guns and my reloading practices.

Drew

Drew,

That was not a critique on how you load. Only to get you to understand that how you load creates problems that YOU need to correct. I used you as a guiney pig because I felt sure of what your comeback would be.

So .... cut your bullets to bore diameter or take them up .002 from what you are using and dynamics change. In addition to taking longer to size, a larger diameter bullet increases case neck tension too. Which may solve or create a problem depending on what success you are having.

That is why I hate to hear recommendations to choke everything. Choking is the easiest way to achieve acceptable accuracy success. But it seldom is the most accurate method for any gun unless your throat is cut so tight that .0005 over bore diameter causes you effort to close a bolt. Like on CB BR guns. At least not in my case. I even shoot undersize to bore at times that just blows everything out of the water with no leading. But conditions HAVE to be right.

Try changing sizing dies. People don't realize how much difference there is in sizing dies with in the same brand and caliber. I have two RCBS full length sizers in 458X2. One is just a full length sizer as you would expect. The other is the same but is also like an added neck sizer. It almost produces a shoulder on a straight sided case. And these different sizing dies work better for different weights and diameters of bullets. I can make 3031 burn with 50% case capacity with one set of dies and .002 over bullets and not need filler to produce consistent ballistics. Add filler and my ES goes the other way. I can burn 4895 too. And Varget if I use 400+ grain bullets and fill the case. Or .... I can use my other set of dies and bore sized bullets and then can't get 3031 to burn for crap regardless of whether I use filler or compress or not.

So you must deal with the specific set of conditions YOU as the reloader create. If you get lucky and create a working combination right off, you tend to formulate one opinion of that technique as a go to method. Until it doesn't work somewhere else for some reason. Like choking. What that means is that you will never explore other options that may create a more accurate set of conditions.

Filler compensates for other things that you don't consider or correct. THAT is the point.

And I appologize to Joe for hijacking the thread.

[9.3X62AL]

Joe--

What a thing to wake up to......I had to go out to the gun safe and gave a close look at my #1's chamber this morning! THANKS LOADS!

Most of my shooting with the 45-70 lately uses 100% density powder columns, the duplexed WC-860 loads that give 1873-level ballistics and pretty decent accuracy. I am striving to find loads for the 25-20 WCF and 32-20 WCF with similar high-percentage loading densities.....RL-7 gives OK results, and AA-1680 or WC-680 will get the next test drive in this direction..

I do use fillers--dacron is my usual material. One concern I have with this stuff is that sufficient dacron to fill the empty space as described above often leaves a puffy, leftover wisp floating through the air, and a distinctive odor that I believe indicates burning fibers. My concern is that the burning material could land in some of the almost-incendiary dry brush that areas I hunt in are full of. I am very conscious of this possibility, given my background as a fire cause/origin investigator. The likelihood of such an incident occurring as described may be remote, but Murphy's Law gets no plea bargains--and sometimes even Murphy is naively optimistic. So--I avoid using "fillered" loads in the brushlands during dry times. With this thrust in mind, I always try a new load with and without filler, to see if acceptable results can be had minus the dacron--and the work with RL-7 and soon with AA-1680 is pointed in that direction.

[Jon K]

Al,

Try 5.5 grains of Unique in the 32-20. Shoot very accurate in my Low Wall. With the Saeco 118 gr boolit seated to the crimp groove, it has .121 of air space. If you are using a lever with a large chamber, this might be too much.

Jon

[Dale53]

Charlie Dell was a very good friend of mine. We spent time in each others homes. When he was barreling my Peregrine Schuetzen rifle, I spent a week with him. Every evening we would sit in his den winding down from the days activities with a dram of Single Malt (he) and Bourbon (me). That is the time we discussed "saving the world" and other fine topics, including ringing barrels. Charlie made up brass barrels that yielded much sooner to the "ringing force" so he could try to "ring at will" (if you cannot reproduce the problem it is only guessing). He was successful in learning what it takes to ring a barrel. The Frenchman Viehle over a hundred years ago determined what the cause was and Charlie was just trying to reproduce his findings. Charlie could ring a barrel "at will".

The cause is a parallel flame front from the powder caused by a wad down on the powder (Charlie could actually ring a barrel without a wad by shooting the rifle directly straight up - this proved the parallel theory). The wad, holding the powder "square" with the bore caused this parallel flame front of pressure. When it reached the base of the bullet it became a "ringing force". The effect is accumulative. Charlie determined that if the wad (a solid wad) is off the powder .100"-.200" the ringing force is reduced to the point that with modern chrome moly barrels the hoop strength is enough that it is highly unlikely to produce any problems. The wad being off the powder charge allows the powder to "slump" and without the parallel flame front of pressure, the ringing force is either greatly reduced or is non-existent.

I firmly believe Charlie's findings and as far as I am concerned that is the final answer. If you must use a wad to get proper ballistics, just keep if off the powder by .100"-.200". I use a wad in my Schuetzen rifle and made a wad seater that does just that (,32/.357 Dell).

Dacron filler for some yet unknown reason aggravates the problem and makes it more likely to happen. Charlie preferred a solid wad (off the powder by .100-.200" to allow the powder to slump) in his use with Schuetzen rifles. Field Rifles, used in conditions where the wad is apt to be dislodged may not be such good condidates for a solid wad just off the powder.

Use of the chronograph with your loads of powder only, can often allow you to get decent results with the black powder cartridges when using reduced loads of smokeless powder. I have had good results with my 45/70's, for instance, when using 4198 or RL-7 with no wads. That is my preference for field loads (an appropriate powder that allows reduced loads with NO filler).

Dale53

[The Double D]

There is one fly in the ointment for the filler argument for which I have no answer. I shoot powder charges in a lot of different calibers that don't entirely fill the case. Therfore, there is airspace between the powder and the base of the bullet. All of this powder DOES NOT burn inside the case into one even wave. So in essence, the powder acts like a filler would and slams into the base of the bullet. Because that powder has mass. I have, nor has anyone else apparently ringed a chamber using this method that we blame for ringing using filler.

The contention isn't that any powder space creates ringing its that excessive powder space creates ringinging. The filler issue and ringing come to play when only a small amout of filler is used to holds the powder against the base, still leaving a large air space.

Adding a greater amount filler to take up the air space works just like your loads that fill the airspace with powder. 70% powder capacity being a threshold I was taught years ago. Always be sure the total capacity of the case was no less than 70%. I believe you will also find this in Phil Sharpe's book on reloading. (Caveat: I don't have my copy of Sharpe with me so this could be a wrong source) The wad column or filler functioning just like a longer bullet taking up mor space ihthe case reducing the available space inthe powder chamber of the case.

The real problem is that we don't know if chamber ringing is a one time event or if the effects are accumulative over time. I think that it happens over time because it can get worse if continued. So .... if the effects are accumulative, there has to be a begining. How do we identify that point? Again a question that has no answer.

B/A read Dell's work. Dell was able to predictably and repeatedly create ringing from the first shot. Dell credited ringing to two things old soft barrel steels and the air space. Dell was able to control ringing with variation in types of wads. Dacron being the lleast effective in controlling ringing, kapok and news paper the best.

Maybe chamber ringing is a much greater problem than we realize simply because we can't identify the begining. And therefore, someone never knows that they have ringed their chamber until it progresses to identification. At which point we feel we have to blame something. We blame large capacity straight walled cases. Well, it would be easier to visually identify there. And, statistically a lot of these types of guns have the thinest steel barrels making them .... susceptible to the problem. Even if they have heavier steel, it is usually of lower grade, again making it easier to occur there. So is it occurring elsewhere and we just don't see the results?

Actually even without an understanding of the phenomenon your statement is very true. There is lot of stuff that was well understood in the old days but over time has been forgotton. Ammunition has changed. The large old cases are seldom used any more. It's only when we go back and try to apply modern standards for smaller size case to the big old ones do we run ito problems. Instead of using the big old case like the were intend we try to load them down and use components that werent around when the original lartridges were developed. We can revisit the old writings and learn a lot.

Now see my results are the exact opposite. I have used filler to improve crappy loads or to burn stuff I should not be using. But I have never .... in my life ever produced the finest accuracy from any caliber using any type of filler.

Filler .... will .... correct a problem at times for sure. Solid fillers will enable higher velocities with softer mixes for sure. But if no problem with ignition exists, then a fluffy filler always takes accuracy the other way in my experience.

I have no doubt that what you are saying correct. It mirrors my intial findings 100%. But your statement also point to the "why", at least in my experience. Fluffy fillers. If they are fluffy they are not filling. I compress my kapok in my 577/450 cases. It's not fluffy at all. I also weigh each ball of kapok for consistancy. No arbitary sized wad pulled off and stuffed in.

So in essence, a fluffy filler is a good check for reloaders. If you get accuracy improvement from using it, then you are using the wrong powder speed for your application or you have another problem. This is one MAJOR factor why larger diameter bullets work so well for a lot of people. They cure ignition problems as they take time to size down. Or change primer. Improve case neck tension. But find the problem and fix it. If you are using the wrong powder, then why not switch to a correct powder and aviod the ringing risk?.

Not always true with large capacity cases. There isn't a smokeless powder made that is going to give you 80-90% capacity and be safe to shoot in a Martini case.

My NfB loads follow the guidlines laid out by Ross Seyfried for shooting smokeless in the old black powder case-- 40% of the black powder load in IMR 4198 with as much dacron as you can get compressed in the case.

35 grs of IMR 4198 does not fill much case in the 577/450. It won't even ignite consistantly and some times not at all without filler. Add 8 grs. of Kapok and it works. I get 2 1/2 to 3 inch groups at at 1450 fps at 100 yards with this load compared to 5 to 6 inches with the normal LoC load of 85 frs. of Fg at 1400 fps.. Test that I have ran in the past month found me shooting 75 grs. of 1 1/2 FG and getting 1 1/2 to 2 inch groups with 3 grs. of kapok compressed over the powder and again between 1400 and 1500 fps. Gotta figure out why accuracy is good and velocity ragged with this load. Primer?

On the other hand using shotgun or pistol powder in these big case is no good either. If you need gallery loads for the Martini get an insert and shoot 45 colt or something---now there is a good filler, steel or brass.

An old timer once told me that a filler is a lazy mans crutch to load development.

How old was he?

Greame Wright while researching for his book Shooting the British Double Rifles tore down a lot of the old turn of the 19th-20th century BPE nitro cartridges made by Kynoch and Eley to see how they were loaded to create the NfB loads. What he found were long wad columns. He applied that to his research and came up with modern loads for the big old cartridges. Kynoch is applying the technique to their new loaded ammo and using foam-like earplug foam- for filler.

[felix]

Charlie Dell is indeed correct. It is a strong wavefront that causes havoc, and in the case with a SEE condition, that wavefront is almost 100 percent guaranteed to contain many smaller waves which were built up to make the really big one, which can do some real damage to the barrel and/or action. A filler should be square to the base of the boolit and have air holes in it to allow for the break up of waves. Gunpowder is the best filler, obviously. If using toilet paper, newspaper, for the wad, that wad should be loose fitting and very irregular in shape. I don't like the idea of a square wad of any sort, unless up against the boolit. ... felix

[Bass Ackward]

Double D,

Very good. The problem is that the devil is always in the details. Producing ringing is great. We are more interested in prevention. That is my point. Is the effect accumulative where barrel steel is tough enough or thick enough not to be able to see the beginning effects? I ask because a guy shooting thousands of rounds loaded exactly the same way that says ringing is bull crap or I have figured out the filler riddle only to finally have it happen to him?

Now let's apply this to shotguns. And Felix you can join in too. Would you please explain a modern shotgun wad then. Large case space, solid, sealing wad firmly seated on top of the powder. Air space with flimsy plastic recoil reducers in between a fairly heavy shot load. Fairly thin barrel steel made for relatively low pressures by todays standards and in some cases softer steel barrels. Recipie for ringing?

The point I was trying to make is that accidents can happen in a lot of ways. The more opportunity you give for that to happen, the more you improve your odds. You should have enough knowledge to know, then you can make the decision whether to accept the risk.

In my opinion, across all cartridge designs, fillers are used more than necessary in the world of cast.