Shooters Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,632 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Because technology and gun strength are constantly changing, this board allows almost unrestricted posting of technical information, much of which is unsuitable for any but advanced reloaders to attempt to work with. In order to protect the less experienced and less cautious persons from making unwarranted assumptions and thereby hurting themselves, we ask that all descriptions of Heavy and Extra Heavy loads and loads not published by a reputable source be preceded with the following caution. Please copy and paste it into your post.

CAUTION: This post discusses loads or load data that equals or exceeds published maximums for the cartridge(s) mentioned. Neither the writer, The Shooter's Forum, nor the staff of The Shooter's Forum assume any liability for damage or injury resulting from using this information. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DUPLICATE THE DESCRIBED LOADS without first working them up from a published safe starting level charge while watching for pressure signs. If you don't know how to do that, don't try.

For loads that have no published equivalent anywhere:

CAUTION: This post discusses experimental load suggestions that are not published anywhere, nor have they been properly tested for safety and may exceed published pressure maximums for the cartridge(s) mentioned. Neither the writer, The Shooter's Forum, nor the staff of The Shooter's Forum assume any liability for damage or injury resulting from using this information. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DUPLICATE THE DESCRIBED LOADS without first working them up while watching for pressure signs. If you don't know how to do that, don't try.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
My Apology To All of You

I recently gave out my personal loading info for my 45 X 7.62x54R, which I use in a 45 Colt/ 410 Contender barrel. I obtained the actual load from my 1973 Lyman Cast Bullet Manual, and it was a cast bullet load for the 45/70 1873 Springfield, and not for the 444 Marlin. Its the mildest load for a 45/70, so I use it in my Contender where its still a relatively mild but extremely accurate load. BUT may not be the case with your own firearm. So I apologize for my mistake
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,489 Posts
Unclenick,
When in Black Powder loading is the disclaimer needed? From what I have read to date BP loads should have a Fill percentage fo 99 to over 100 percent (for compressed charges) of case net volume.
Which end fo the range would need the disclamer?

I do know Duplex loads and straight Smokeless Powder loads would need the Disclaimer for anything above basic Starting level charges or if someone is reporting REDUCED H-110 or W296 charges.

Best Regards,
Chev. William
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,632 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Good question. I suspect it would come up mainly in the context of muzzle loading rifles where you are not limited by a cartridge case as to how much powder you can put in. Recommending 3F where 2F or F is called for is another possibility. I don't have enough experience with BP to say more without researching it a bit.

The difficulty with muzzle loaders is, without cases there are few pressure signs available to study before safe pressure is exceeded. You can attach a strain gauge instrument and take a measurement. You can use a micrometer to measure the chamber expanding permanently by more than 0.1% (the strain result of what the British call proof stress, where we use 0.2% and call it yield stress), and then back off by a factor of two. I read somewhere that, in centuries past, BP cannon were proofed with double the design charge, and if that didn't stretch the gun more than 0.1%, it passed and the normal charge used thereafter. All in all, I think the strain gauge and slow work up is a more elegant solution.
 

·
The Troll Whisperer (Moderator)
Joined
·
23,917 Posts
IMHO - the blanket disclaimer policy should apply to ALL loading issues. As speculated, 2F, 3F, 4F, duplex, etc., all could be misunderstood and cause injury or firearm destruction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,489 Posts
Unclenick and Kdub,
I guess I was not clear, or made an "assumption" in my question about Black Powder loads and use to 'Disclaimer'.

From my point of view I was asking about CARTRIDGE Black Powder only, BP and Smokeless Duplex, and straight Smokeless Powder Loads as that is what I am interested in.

1. What is the Maximum Compression for a given Black Powder charge?
1a. What is the Minimum Compression for a given Black Powder Charge?
2. What level of "fill" of black powder would require the 'Disclaimer' to be added?
3. Which Grades of BP would Require a 'Disclaimer' for Cartridge use?
4. Does that vary with the net volume of the case?
5. How does 'seating depth' of the bullet in the CARTRIDGE affect Black Powder loads?

These Questions come to mind due to the answers posted to date.

Example: I have loaded a .25ACP case with 4.5 Grains of 3fg Goex and seated the bullet initially to .840" overall length, which resulted in the case 'bulging and 'locking into the Shell Holder.

I then loaded the next trial at .850" Overall length with out the case bulging.
NOTE: this is the same 4.5 grain 3fg Goex Charge, 25ACP Cases and 50 Grain JRN Bullets.

Normal overall length for the .25ACP is about .900" (with Smokeless powders).

Would this load need the disclaimer?

What about a Grade 3 PTL Blank inserted in a 9/32"x.014"wall Brass tube swaged down to .276" diameter, trimmed to a "Case Length of 1.118", and using a 51 grain Lead Bullet to substitute for a ".25 Stevens RF"?

Best Regards,
Chev. William
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
So much Invaluable information. I'm glad I read this. (It did say to read before posting)
I am NOT going to experiment!!! Just gonna follow the instructions. Which as a Newb to this is no better option.
 

·
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
Joined
·
11,516 Posts
I quit posting load information a couple of years ago after I finally realized that even with disclaimers and wiggle words, it NEVER works for some people.
That's why.

What started as a polite, off the record request, has turned into a "The data suggests" or "This manual says" or "It's safe if you don't use balloon head cases" or "They reamed the same action to 44 magnum" or "Was published by Ackley" or "Today's brass is better" argument.

The "data" may suggest it, but I don't want to think that someone who has a less than stellar clone or their family heirloom in the caliber mentioned tries the suggested load(s) and it ends up like this.

https://www.shootersforum.com/attac...-bore-black-shadow-444-blowen20rifel20005.jpg

Yes, it's a Marlin in 45-70 but the end result could still be the same.

RJ
 

·
The Troll Whisperer (Moderator)
Joined
·
23,917 Posts
broom jm -


Let's be clear on something. A "limited number" of Modrators didn't lean heavy on a member - the majority discussed this in our private forum and came to agreement that a word of caution should be given the member in a Private Message. The member then went public in the General Discussion forum (which is the wrong place to post on reloading matters) and was upset when it was redirected to the proper forum for discussion.


You probably will note that I often caution fellow members (especially new ones trolling for "accurate loads for my new rifle") not to place much credence in personal loadings listed on the internet. Rather, look up such in reliable loading manuals or websites displayed by the manufacturers of bullets/propellants. As often repeated - what works well in your firearm could be a potential bomb in someone else's.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
37,100 Posts
Jack,

After due consideration, if you can point to MODERN, PRESSURE-TESTED load data for the .44-40, then we may well consider it. Use the example of 'Ruger-only' loads for the .45 Colt. Our usual bullet/powder sources went to the trouble of developing and testing that data specifically for the large-frame Rugers, T/Cs, and so on. Since it is out in print, then there is a second source for a reloader (and us) to check anything that appears on the forum. In addition, many of the modern .45 Colt loads are with 300gr. bullets and loaded to where they won't fit in an old SAA, anyway. That's how I load mine. Too long to fit in guns from the 1800s.

Don't cite Ackley as 'proof' that your loads are OK. For one thing, nothing he wrote was pressure tested by him. Second, components change over time and his stuff was published a LONG time ago.

If you buy a pressure trace, and get some data, then the issue can be revisited. The .44-40 is just a poor candidate to have data floating around when one of the rounds could end up in a handgun that was barely sufficient to contain black-powder pressures, from the dawn of modern metallurgy.

That's how I see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,489 Posts
Question - Do the Propellant Manufacturers in their load development testing use a SAAMI 'Recommended" test Breech And Barrel combination for measuring Pressures and Velocities?
Chev. William
 

·
The Shadow (Moderator)
Joined
·
8,527 Posts
Propellant manufacturers are defense contractors, or state owned defense conglomerates. So they will test to the customers spec, which pretty much means NATO EPVAT test standards, or CIP standards.

But to the spirit of how things get pressure tested, minimum spec reference barrels with transducers, in universal receivers.

SAAMI, CIP and NATO testing all varies slightly from one another, primarily in the location where the pressure measurement is taken. That difference in measurement, when not understood, is why people think the 5.56 & 223 run different pressures; when they do not.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,632 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
To the top, so new members notice it.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top