Shooters Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
81 - 100 of 103 Posts

·
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
Joined
·
10,444 Posts
The fact that H110 and WW296 are now thought of as the same powder when 99% of reloading manuals and on line data would suggest that they aren't by posting them separately and with two different loads tells me they are indeed different LOTS of the same powder, different names and for all intents and purposes to me, different powders. The stated loads are "safe" by design as tested at the time by the manual authors

Alliant's own on line manual states a reduced load for 2400 over the same usage from a Hodgdon manual produced in 1995. My own testing of "new" 2400 in two handgun calibers with both cast and jacketed bullets proves (at least to me) that this is true as are H110 loads from the same manual compared to "new" on line Hodgdon data if we are to believe what is printed in both hard copy and on the interweb.

Age of powder and storage practices also affect a powder's "strength". Paper sacks of 4895 of an unknown age purchased at the train depot in 95% humidity Bumphuque Florida in 1965 for 30 cents a pound, then hermetically sealed in a mayonnaise or pickle jar for 50 years do not qualify as good test material either for comparison to "new" lots of IMR4895.

RJ

YMMV
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkker

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #82 (Edited)
While powders vary from lot to lot, St. Marks has been manufacturing WC296 for decades. This is marketed as WW296 and Hodgdon H110. When switching lots you should drop the charge and work back even though nothing else has changed. Powders do vary from lot to lot. Ballisticians are individuals and interpret information differently. Cases are different and every component used varies from one source to another.

Closed bomb tests (the way that burn speeds are calculated) has almost no meaning when fired in a gun because guns use an expanding chamber - as the bullet moves down the barrel the powder space expands.

All I can do is interpret what is safe in my guns - strangely I get velocities that are very close in my two 357 revolvers. That is not the norm I assure you. I have compared two 357 revolvers side by side before that were the same make and model and had 200 fps difference in the velocities. Tighter or smoother barrels? It doesn't matter to me. As long as I get cases that can be used more than 10 (20) times without expanding primer pockets or sticking in the chambers (cylinders) and I get 1" groups at 25 yards I am happy. I work my loads up very carefully and my reloading technique never changes so as long as those loads are safe in my gun I will use them as I have for the last 45+ years.

Are they safe in YOUR gun? I don't know. They are safe in the 3 Rugers and the one Uberti that I have fired them in. I believe they are safe in the large model Smiths as the original loads were worked up in those guns. Are they safe in the medium frame Smiths and Colts, probably but they do tend to rattle the side plates loose. If I owned a Colt I would not shoot any 357 loads through it. They are known for coming out of time from both "misuse" and heavy loads.
That is why I buy Rugers. They are made for 357 ammo and don't come with a recommendation to use lesser rounds to prolong their life. If a company makes a 357 revolver, it should be capable of 357 loads - continuously. Otherwise it is a 38 special +P with an over-length chamber. (just my opinion)

I make a habit of NOT recommending my loads to others because I don't know them or their guns. I do expect a 357 to fire full house 357 loads but I always stop with the most accurate load which is typically below the maximum listed load. When I buy more powder I will drop the charge and work it up to find the most accurate round again. That will likely be next year. If I have to change bullets I will do the same. I had to do that when Speer dropped their 140 JHP in favor of a 135 grain. The Hornady seems to be just as accurate so I will use it until that changes. I can always fall back to the Sierra 140 JHC and work up a load for that one. I do need to build another Fackler Box to test these Hornady bullets to see how they perform compared to what I have used.
Any reloaders who are loading for the 357 will pick their own powder and work up their own loads. I hope that they will pay attention to any signs of over pressure in their guns and load responsibly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,205 Posts
Anybody remember 'SuperVel' ammunition? It was advertised as REALLY hot and was the ammo that locked up the S&W M66 and got a cop killed. Changes were made before LEOs could buy them again.

At that time (early '70s), it was said that all 'magnum' revolver cartridges were loaded with H-110/296 manufactured barely out of sight of the gunshop where I worked. Olin people were good customers. They said SuperVel was, 'nothing but H-110 in excess'. Assuming they were loaded with H-110, they were two grains over book max in every loading I weighed. The 125 gr HP load in a 2 3/4 M19 were a flashbulb!
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
While powders vary from lot to lot, St. Marks has been manufacturing WC296 for decades. This is marketed as WW296 and Hodgdon H110. When switching lots you should drop the charge and work back even though nothing else has changed. .
They do change, and they have changed.

Olin built powder, built in the St. Louis arsenal and Badger or Lake City beginning in the 1940's. Then in 1969 built the plant we know today as St. Marks. Different times, places, processes and owners. Then in 1998, General Dynamics bought the plant and further changed things. So technically GD has been manufacturing for decades. But the powder is much older than that. I don't follow rocket and mortar waste streams, but I do follow rifle. WC846 was patented in 1937, there are many well documented changes to that powder over time, but it is still identified as WC 846.
To RJ's story about Hodgdon's beginning: so he buys rickety box cars for if paper bags of "WC846" from the thirties through the 60's.. Hidgy never changed the names on the powders they sell to you. Now that those powders and days are gone and they buy current production from GD, it REALLY isn't the same thing; but Hodgy will never admit that. .
Back to them not saying a word about the silent supplier changes on some IMR-4064 two years ago.


Hodgdon is in the business of selling a waste product with ZERO publicly stated standards, to people who, for the most part won't actually buy equipment to test and see how variable those things can be.
..... But some of us do......;)

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #85
Darkker,
If the cases slide out of a revolver after being fired and the primer pocket is still tight after twenty reloads when the mouth splits it doesn't sound to me like there is excessive pressure when used in my guns.

You are a rifle shooter (supposition on my part) Are the primer pockets in your cases still tight after twenty reloads? I know guys that shoot long range rifle who have to throw cases away after just 4 reloads because the pockets have swelled. Now, to me, their loads are over pressure for their guns and ammo combination.

I don't load that way. I have never exceeded the maximum listed load but I almost always load up to it to see if there are any signs of excessive pressure up to and including maximum loads. I had a TCR that showed signs of excessive pressure (blowing primers out the first round) with minimum starting loads. I recambered that 6mm TCU to 6mm-30 and solved the problem after trying everything I could think of and sending it back to TC twice to see if they could fix it. The 30-30 necked down to 6mm turned out to be a great round even if it was expensive to convert. I did the reaming and other mods but I had to get The reamers made and a set of dies made on top of the machine work. It turned out to be a tack driver with decent hunting power for deer. It was a gift to my brother when I was through with it.
Hodgdon markets the powder and is not involved in testing it other than reloading data which is typically well under SAAMI pressure in the powders and guns that I use. The manufacturer is the responsible party to meet standards, not the distributor or retailer.
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
1) If the cases slide out of a revolver after being fired and the primer pocket is still tight after twenty reloads when the mouth splits it doesn't sound to me like there is excessive pressure when used in my guns.

2) You are a rifle shooter (supposition on my part) Are the primer pockets in your cases still tight after twenty reloads?
3) I know guys that shoot long range rifle who have to throw cases away after just 4 reloads.
4) Now, to me, their loads are over pressure for their guns and ammo combination.
5) I have never exceeded the maximum listed load but I almost always load up to it to see if there are any signs of excessive pressure up to and including maximum loads.
I had a TCR that showed.....
6) Hodgdon markets the powder and is not involved in testing it other than reloading data which is typically well under SAAMI pressure in the powders and guns that I use. The manufacturer is the responsible party to meet standards, not the distributor or retailer.
I have to keep things numbered to keep from rambling more than I do;):D

1) "in my gun" is a caveat for different components with the same name. But an individual gun isn't exempt from the laws of physics.

2) Once I realized my feelings didn't mean chit, yes they last far longer than 20 loads. When I still believed I could "read" pressure signs by having a staring contest with a piece of metal, I typically blew up cases around #5. I honestly don't remember if I publicly stated this in the thread, but when I began pressure testing Superformance in the Creed; I had a lot of powder that was more than 15% different than the lot tested by Dave Emery. Similarly I've shared where I've blown 308 cases apart when I was firing 45,000psi loads. "Signs" just aren't reliable for pressure, they're only reliable for failure.

3) Yep, I was once there, and was silly enough to think it was because of "cheap brass". Turns out it was an idiot with his booger-hook on the bang-switch. :eek:

4) Their loads are over-pressure, PERIOD. Their gun isn't exempt from physics. If you read some of the pressure tests I've shared, a common rifle chambering in a modern rifle will express "signs" when you are roughly 15,000psi OVER SAAMI limits.:eek::eek:

5) My mother once told me she could see my pregnant wife had "the signs" of carrying a boy. That baby turned out to be my beautiful little girl. :rolleyes:

I've loaded well below a manual max charge, and blown things up while pressure testing. Because my lot of powder was far different than what was in my reference source. Manuals rarely tell you if the data is current testing. They never list lot numbers tested, they never tell you if it's simply calculated. They don't tell you if it's known to be very old data which was supplied. Pressure "signs" tell you if components are nearing failure, which has no concrete connection to actual SAAMI/CIP cartridge limits.

6) Not true.
If it's one of the "Winchester" powders, Olin is to supply powder they don't make, and pressure data for it. Hodgdon is to publish that data and sell the powder; even if they know it's ancient data. I did a thread discussing this years ago during a business coup. Anyway, for Hodgdon branded powders they order a range of specs, but if they want to verify anything they are responsible for actually testing. They pay Western for the bulk of the testing, but do some in-house. They have some modern equipment, but use a pile of crushers still.

This is really the Crux of the matter though, isn't it?
Use the IMR-4064 mess from a few years ago:
When they ask for a powder similar in burning rate to something they bought 10 years ago, they will get a bomb test. They won't pay for honest pressure data for 100 different cartridges....

As a seller of someone else's products, as far as the state is concerned the manufacturer is responsible for the guarantees on the tag. As far as my customer is concerned, it's my problem regardless of my input on the production of a product.
Then compound that issue with something that was bought as rejected surplus from a totally different customer. Think the manufacturer has ANY responsibility to the second owner of a waste product at auction? Heck no!!!!

So is it "the same"? Per bomb test, probably so. Per reality in any given cartridge, most definitely not.

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #87
Darkker,
There is nothing in your response that I find fault with.
I will ask if you think -not believe but think - that a load that can be used in a revolver that fired cases slip out of the cylinders and last without loose primers for 20 reloads is a load that is extreme in that gun under the conditions of use.
If you think it is then how do you arrive at that determination?
Paul
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
Darkker,

I will ask if you think -not believe but think - that a load that can be used in a revolver that fired cases slip out of the cylinders and last without loose primers for 20 reloads is a load that is extreme in that gun under the conditions of use.
If you think it is then how do you arrive at that determination?
Paul
Should be doable.

Over on one of the Creed sites, there is a popular load that I can all but promise is north of 70,000psi. The reports are that when using Lapua SR brass, most are getting reload counts well into the upper teens or twenties. It's considered the "cost" of competitive shooting. Which seems perfectly reasonable, based on some high-pressure testing I've done with high round counts.
Similarly in a thread I did about a 308 where the burning curve ran away, the one trace I shared and several others; had multiple spikes(think of an M shape) well over 70,000psi. In one series we were kissing 80K :eek::eek:
None of those shots had any funny recoil, report, velocity, primer issues, or even slightly difficult ejection or extraction.
Naturally with secondary ignitions, I had no interest in holding on to a bomb for endurance tests.
There is a prominent gunsmith who pressure tests, who has become somewhat famous for blowing the ends of barrels off his rifle for a show. I know that those cases used, last for many reloads as well.

Lapua has publicly stated that they are using C260 case alloy, but since WWII no one else that I'm aware of does. We also know that with the GMM cases from Federal, obturation is their focus; so cases can be quite soft well down into the head. So even if they were using the same alloy, softening it makes it not what it is, or was, or whatever. I've run loads around 50,000 psi, which blew low round-count case heads off; and grew the extractor groove by 0.15":eek::mad:

That is why relying upon signs for pressure knowledge, is so random and unhelpful. The only thing that they reliably tell you, is whether or not a component reached it's plastic deformation limit. Which may or may not have anything to do with any specific operating pressure.


Cheers
 

·
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
Joined
·
10,444 Posts
Darkker,

I will ask if you think -not believe but think - that a load that can be used in a revolver that fired cases slip out of the cylinders and last without loose primers for 20 reloads is a load that is extreme in that gun under the conditions of use.

If you think it is then how do you arrive at that determination?
Paul
I'm feeling left out.

As I can't see or feel how your cases slip out of the cylinder and don't know if you are shooting a double or single action I can't say. However, if you are getting north of twenty reloads it is very likely that your load is not extreme.

shooterPaul, I would like you to offer your opinion as to why my grain for grain loads using H110 and 2400 with comparable bullets from 1977 aren't as "extreme" as that load with today's powder?

RJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Both CUP and PSI are approximations of actual pressure. CUP is a system of indirect pressure measurement before fast response pressure transducers were invented with its own scale and unique inaccuracies some of which are caliber dependent. CUP is inherently more inaccurate than PSI and the results are conservatively adjusted. PSI is a more direct measurement with typical instrument inaccuracies. If identical loads measured with the two methods clock the same speed then they are measuring the same pressure, whatever it actually is. The SAAMI system is designed so that ammo and firearms have a standard for design for compatibility and safety. The SAAMI design criteria includes factors of safety to ensure that the threshold for catastrophic material failure is not approached so a discussion of the actual pressure is somewhat academic.

The bottom line is use the most current reloading tables. If you deviate, and wildcatters do it all the time, know what your doing because you're on your own if something goes wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #91
I'm feeling left out.

As I can't see or feel how your cases slip out of the cylinder and don't know if you are shooting a double or single action I can't say. However, if you are getting north of twenty reloads it is very likely that your load is not extreme.

shooterPaul, I would like you to offer your opinion as to why my grain for grain loads using H110 and 2400 with comparable bullets from 1977 aren't as "extreme" as that load with today's powder?

RJ
RJ,
I can tell you that I have had to modify my loads when switching to a new lot of powder with H110 to keep the same accuracy. I can tell you that velocities in my gun have varied ~200 fps with the same load but it is not always down. One lot of powder shows less velocity and another lot will give higher velocities.
I have not noticed any consistent reduction in similar powder charges of H110 over the last 40 years or more. My reloading records go back almost 45 years so I can only answer for H110. I don't use 2400 so I have no history to base it on. The load I use in my 357 with a 140 grain bullet still gets very close to the 1600 fps that I am used to shooting. (1599.2 average with 20 shots) The SAAMI specs still refer to the maximum velocity of a 140 grain bullet as 1600 + a bit as the velocity that a maximum load should provide. I can't get that velocity using the 18 grain maximum load in the Speer or Lyman manual or the 17 grain maximum listed in the Hodgdon manual or from the 19 grain maximum load in the Hodgdon 2016 manual. I do get that velocity before reaching the 19.6 grain maximum in the Sierra edition V 6th printing.
I can also tell you that I have recorded velocities from two Rugers of the same make and model with 4 inch barrels that were more than 200 fps different with the same loads on the same day under the same chronograph.
There are a lot of unknowns when it comes to why we get the variations in loads with identical components which is why I find an accurate load that is safe in my gun and use it. I never exceed a maximum listed load and I always work my loads up to the point of accuracy without going over that maximum. If I can't find an accurate load I change components and try again.
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
RJ,
1) One lot of powder shows less velocity and another lot will give higher velocities.

2) The SAAMI specs still refer to the maximum velocity of a 140 grain bullet as 1600 + a bit as the velocity that a maximum load should provide.

3) I can't get that velocity using the 18 grain maximum load in the Speer or Lyman manual or the 17 grain maximum listed in the Hodgdon manual or from the 19 grain maximum load in the Hodgdon 2016 manual. I do get that velocity before reaching the 19.6 grain maximum in the Sierra edition V 6th printing.
......There are a lot of unknowns when it comes to why we get the variations in loads with identical components which is why I find an accurate load that is safe in my gun and use it. I never exceed a maximum listed load
I can also tell you that I have recorded velocities from two Rugers of the same make and model with 4 inch barrels that were more than 200 fps different with the same loads on the same day under the same chronograph.
.
1) That's because the lots are different, and give different pressures.

2) You are cherry picking data, but ignoring the pertinent info again.
https://saami.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ANSI-SAAMI-Z299.3-CFP-and-R-Approved-2015-12-14-Posting-Copy.pdf
They are testing from a universal receiver and test barrel, not a revolver. Similarly they don't say a thing about being able to achieve those pressures and velocities with commercially available H110.;)

3) In fact you do go over maximum loads.
You specifically ignored the velocities at those charge weights, and ignored every manual which suggested much lower charges; further making it obvious that the lot differences can be rather great.
The closest old Sierra manual that I glanced at shows 19.5gr of H110 at a max of 1350fps.

So you cherry picked a velocity from one source, cherry picked a charge weight and powder from another source, ignored several in between; then claimed you don't over-load anything.

Knowing all that, "Safe in my gun" suddenly becomes the same as:
I replaced the factory 33" tall tires in my pickup, with 35's, so I know I travel faster than my speedometer reads. I saw a speed limit sign on the freeway that said "70 mph". So while traveling on a county road (50) I set my cruise to "70". When the State Trooper pulled me over, I told him that "I wasn't speeding , according to my speedometer". :rolleyes:

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #93
Darkker,
I think you are missing the pertinent data;
In MY guns the loads produce absolutely no sign of excessive pressure.
The fired cases fall out of the cylinder under their own weight.
I get more than 20 reloads from the brass cases (the nickel cases split necks quicker) without loose primer pockets.
The loads are the most accurate in MY guns printing sub-one inch groups at 25 yards.
My loads do not exceed the listed maximum load in the Sierra manual.
If you would like to pressure test my ammo I will gladly supply you with a few rounds to test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
This question might be a bit off topic, but what does arguing this actually do? The only reason I can think of to worry about the pressures is dealing with wear on the gun (as previous posts have mentioned middling losses or gains in speed with different powders at different pressures.) To measure that, we'd have to determine how hard the gun steel is and how PSI (as it seems the more accurate measurement here) relates to its hardness. Or, we could drill a hole in the case and connect it to a barometer designed for it to test the pressure in the chamber (which doesn't tell us how it will affect the gun). Lastly, we could shoot the gun as measure the stress placed on it by the cartridge over time. Of course, I'm rather inexperienced with this stuff, so feel free to correct me where I'm wrong, but this discussion begs the question:

Why exactly are we arguing this?
Why? This is the internet, that’s why. :)
 

·
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
Joined
·
10,444 Posts
shooterPaul, you must be living right because in my three 357's nor my 44's, no spent casing will "fall out of its own weight" no matter the load, brand of brass, clean or dirty. How ever you are getting that done, my hat is off to you.

And as stated in #91 that you also have noticed an increase in velocity and pressure with new lots of H110, yes? I found it harder to keep up with than a politician's broken promise list so a few years back I (thinking there was nothing better) bought an 8 pound jug. As age progressed and the need for accuracy over all else came to the forefront my father's teachings came creeping back into my head and I remembered why there was a mostly full round steel can of WW296 in the cupboard above his reloading bench and so many empty 2400 tins that seemed to find their way into the kitchen waste can.

Here is a picture of the firing pin area of my Redhawk. In conversations with Ruger it is "not uncommon to see this in race guns but highly unusual in Redhawks" :rolleyes:



My point, if there is one to be made is I shoot hand guns a lot and I find 2400 (in both 357's and 44's with both cast and jacketed bullets) much more pleasant to shoot "enthusiastic" loads with than H110. The "more pleasant" also equates to "more accurate". The one downside being 2400 is "dirtier" or maybe that's just more dirt and grime from more shooting, I don't know.

ANnyways.

RJ
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBelk

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,205 Posts
THAT is a well used revolver!!

I've never owned a center-fire revolver that can 'shake out' the empties with any load but Speer plastic bullets fired with a primer.

You can sure see by the dished face the action of the primer. Many don't know there was a machinegun at one time that worked from primer recoil. It wasn't reliable because the primer added another part that had to be ejected from the gun and complicated it too much, but he fact there is enough energy to work an action was surprising to me.
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
Darkker,
I think you are missing the pertinent data;
In MY guns the loads produce absolutely no sign of excessive pressure.
The fired cases fall out of the cylinder under their own weight.
I get more than 20 reloads from the brass cases (the nickel cases split necks quicker) without loose primer pockets.
The loads are the most accurate in MY guns printing sub-one inch groups at 25 yards.
My loads do not exceed the listed maximum load in the Sierra manual.
If you would like to pressure test my ammo I will gladly supply you with a few rounds to test.
I have no doubt that you have no "signs", that says nothing about actual pressures.
Further, you took a charge weight from one source, and a velocity from another. That doesn't allow you to claim you aren't loading over book max, you cheery-picked convenient data from several sources.

"Safe in my gun" is code for: I know it's probably overloaded, but it hasn't exploded; so I'll pretend I'm under SAAMI MAP.
If someone wants to load something hot, that's their choice. As long as they don't pretend it isn't hot, or that mixing sources doesn't matter.


Look at Hodgdon's website, and you'll see 1600 & 1700 fps loads with H110. One is crusher data and one is in PSI.
Now we don't know this, but let's pretend it was the same lot tested on the same day. Look at the huge difference in charges for the two systems. That either speaks to how large the lot variances can be, or to how inaccurate crushers are.

Also take note of for far below MAP both systems are. Because the next step up gets really wild and unsafe pressure wise. If you have a 10" barrel on a universal receiver and that lot of powder, you may get those velocities under MAP. A shorter barrel in a mass production wheel gun with cylinder gaps, likely not so much.

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #98
I am not using "cherry picked" data to determine whether my loads are safe or not.
I use the gun and cases to tell me if I am over pressure. The fired cases do fall out of the cylinder under their own weight. In both of my guns, in my son's GP100 and in my brother's Uberti single action. The cases all last over 20 reloads without loose primers. If pressures were close to maximum or over I would expect to see loose primers after that many reloads. If the cases were sticking in the cylinder then I would call that a sign of dangerous pressure. If the primer pockets got loose after 20 reloads I would call that a sign of excessive pressure.
I have offered to send you cases to test for pressure as you say you have the means to do so. I don't have pressure test equipment. I do have manuals and my load is not at or over the maximum listed loads in my manuals. The fact that I get 1599 fps did surprise me but that gun has always had a "faster" barrel than other guns. It was 200 fps faster than my brother's Ruger twin. I have fired well over 40000 rounds from it and the gun is still tight and accurate. That 40000 round number is a bit conservative because when I was shooting Hunter's Pistol Silhouette I was firing 10000 rounds per year for practice and competition. Add to that the weekly shoots with friends and the 40 years since then and the gun has seen a LOT of rounds through it. I only load the one load for it and it will continue to get the same load as long as I can shoot.
The load is safe in my gun is a fact not some hidden signal that I am overloading it. If it was the over pressure load you seem to want it to be it would have disassembled the revolver long ago.
If you want to pressure test the ammo it is available for testing.
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,155 Posts
1) I am not using "cherry picked" data to determine whether my loads are safe or not.
2) I use the gun and cases to tell me if I am over pressure. The fired cases do fall out of the cylinder under their own weight.
3) If pressures were close to maximum or over I would expect to see loose primers after that many reloads.
4) The fact that I get 1599 fps did surprise me but that gun has always had a "faster" barrel than other guns.
5) I have fired well over 40000 rounds from it and the gun is still tight and accurate.
6) If it was the over pressure load you seem to want it to be it would have disassembled the revolver long ago.
If you want to pressure test the ammo it is available for testing.
1) You said you were using SAAMI's velocity, that comes from a 10" barrel on minimum spec pressure equipment and an unstated powder. But you used an old Sierra charge weight of a different powder, while ignoring their velocity at those charges. That is cherry picking data, and ignoring reloading safety 101.

2) The singing sword and it's band of merry cases don't report pressures, only imminent component failure.

3) Based upon nothing but wishful thinking. No one builds brass that does or can conform to a cartridge's SAAMI pressure limits. :rolleyes:

4) There are fast barrels in the world, but more often than not they are like the claims of miracles. Natural law being suspended, but only in a manor which the recipient approves of.... 99% of all "fast" barrel claims, are over pressure, by people who have no clue what pressure they are running anyway. "Miraculous" how that works.

5) Fine, from a pistol I'm not terribly surprised by that round count. Still doesn't tell you where you are in regards to MAP limits.

6) Never said a specific pressure, simply said you are over pressure. I gave some examples of when "signs" show up in rifle brass, which was part of an answer to your question of why "signs" are unreliable. Clearly you didn't want to read that sticky, or look up any of those threads either......
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,072 Posts
Cases falling out of the cylinder, DO NOT tell you what the pressure was. Only that they fell out!

Without pressure testing equipment, you DO NOT know what the pressure is. Only that the components did not fail, in your gun. That means exactly NOTHING in an over-built gun. I'm sure I could crank up the charge weights in one of my Blackhawks, with no issues, but that would not mean that I was NOT over SAAMI pressure limits. It would just mean that MY gun, was overbuilt, compared to MANY other .357s on the market.

And that is the rub. Pressure maximums are not published, to keep YOUR loads in YOUR gun safe. They are published in an attempt to keep ALL loads safe in ALL guns. Once you understand that, they you will realize how ridiculous it is claiming your loads are "within pressure limits" based on pretty much no useful evidence whatsoever.

To take the example a bit further, it is easy enough to buy a .454 Casull, and load up .45 Colt brass, far in excess of SAAMI limits, with no problems whatsoever. None! But it does not mean that your .45 Colt loads, are not in excess of SAAMI pressure limits. Only that they did not exhibit problems in YOUR gun (which happens to be designed to take pressures about 4 times what a typical Colt SAA will).

If you don't understand that, then there isn't any reasoning with you, shooterpaul.
 
81 - 100 of 103 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top