The Firearms Forum banner

21 - 40 of 55 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
Ha.....so I haven't totally lost my powers of recall. That's what I said in my first post. 4895, thank you for confirming that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4895

·
Administrator
Into Antiques & C&R's
Joined
·
11,089 Posts
I am most likely wrong but I thought the low powder detonation from a created air pocket only applied to BP. I was always told make sure you ram that Ball/bullet down tight you don't want a detonation. My concern to was a squib load going to low on powder.
This is what I have read. Smokeless powder does not react the same as BP.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
There is the phenomena of detonation with smokeless powder. It is almost always associated with light loads of fast burning powders in large caliber rifle cases. From what I've read it is thought that rather than burning at a progressive rate as smokeless is supposed to do, it all goes off at once, as in explodes rather than burning progressively. Some think that as the propellant is laying horizontal in the case that the primer flash travels across the entire charge, igniting it all simultaneously. It sorta makes sense and that it does occur is indisputable. Me, I don't know, the above is just what I've read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
Since getting anymore powder of any kind may be a lost cause for a while the thought of using a lower charged load then the "minimum" is really not important anymore . I have about 1/2 pound left of the IMR4895 I bought and will be testing the 175gr soft point bullets now . I sent another question to Hodgen/IMR to see if they might answer . Glad I got plenty of reloaded ammo and got some other powders for handguns mostly and plenty of black powder for my rifles and revolvers that use it . Sooner or later stores will be getting their shipment of powders . I hope at least !!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
The subject of 'reduced loads' is interesting. One thing I've heard of in the past is a thing called "Flash Over". That is where a small charge in the case allows the primer flash to ignite the propellant in the forward part of the case rather than igniting the powder and the instead of ignition moving forward - it moves to the rear. Maybe this is a 'wive's tale', but I understand this to increase pressure in the chamber.

I just play it safe and regard "miniumum/starting load" as just that. I never exceed "maximum load/charge" - but I know that sometimes people get away with doing it. I don't tempt fate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
YIKES ! Had read that the 1893 Mauser didn't like pointy bullets and that was correct or at least with the same charge was using with the 160gr round nose bullets . Might do better with a higher charge so now I am going in the opposite direction !! This whole mess started cause I let myself runout of H4895 . NEVERNEVERNEVER again . I am going to a gun show Saturday and may take it in the shorts but if anyone has it I am buying me some . I got a full notebook of info for my rifles shooting different bullets with H4895 on what's the most accurate charge .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
Soooooo.....you and H-4895 are joined at the hip?
 
  • Like
Reactions: soonerfan66

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Not quite joined , it's just my baby blanket or old pair of boots I can't throw away . It was the powder I first started using when I began reloading and I know what my rifles work with it . I "could" use other powders but would have to try figure out the loads all over again and I am to lazy and tight with my money to want to do that .!!! I have to many rifles to want to even try that .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,171 Posts
The subject of 'reduced loads' is interesting. One thing I've heard of in the past is a thing called "Flash Over". That is where a small charge in the case allows the primer flash to ignite the propellant in the forward part of the case rather than igniting the powder and the instead of ignition moving forward - it moves to the rear. Maybe this is a 'wive's tale', but I understand this to increase pressure in the chamber.

I just play it safe and regard "miniumum/starting load" as just that. I never exceed "maximum load/charge" - but I know that sometimes people get away with doing it. I don't tempt fate.
During the 60s and 70s a lot of research was done using " Flash Over " ammo . It sounded like a good idea however the results were no better or worse than normal ammo and was more difficult to make and ended up being rather expensive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
Lots of folks used to use fillers. Lots of folks also found "rings" in their barrels after shooting such loads. May not happen first time, but sooner or later, it seems to happen to many.
This also goes back to the use of light loads of slow powders and long rifle cases.
All you have to do is move to faster powders as you lower the charge/pressure level.
So, if you like the idea of a filler, without any testing to find if it improves anything, and don't mind replacing the barrel of your rifle, go right ahead.
Safe thing is simply to raise the muzzle in the air so the powder shifts back to the primer, lower rifle and fire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
Only times I use filler in a cartridge is when reloading for my Martini Henry and Snider rifles with black powder and that was the way it was done . I have never used any type of filler with smokeless and don't plan to . That is a area like you stated can turn wrong very quickly if you do not know what your doing and have a complete understanding of the pressure thing . I pretty well know my limits when it comes to reloading and am not to proud to ask advise and if I feel the advise given is a bit shaky and not creditable I won't touch it . Most of the time I stick with what's in the reloading books but like now if it's close I will ask but if still not sure I won't continue , it's just not worth it .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
Lots of folks used to use fillers. Lots of folks also found "rings" in their barrels after shooting such loads. May not happen first time, but sooner or later, it seems to happen to many.
This also goes back to the use of light loads of slow powders and long rifle cases.
All you have to do is move to faster powders as you lower the charge/pressure level.
So, if you like the idea of a filler, without any testing to find if it improves anything, and don't mind replacing the barrel of your rifle, go right ahead.
Safe thing is simply to raise the muzzle in the air so the powder shifts back to the primer, lower rifle and fire.
Prime example of those whose research into and experience with fillers who make blanket statements, is decidedly, if not completely lacking. There's a significant amount of pressure tested data on the use of fillers today. For 40+ years me and probably a million others have been using fillers and have never "ringed" a barrel and, fillers have been in use for significantly over 100 years. If done correctly the odds of ringing a barrel are probably about the same as me winning the lottery. Screw it up and you'll probably ring a barrel. Screw up a handload and you can end up with shrapnel in your carcass.....or worse. Safest thing is to know what you're doing in the first place....and that knowledge didn't come off some you tube channel by some self proclaimed expert.

Back in the 30's, and at the beginning of WWII, Keith and a couple of his cronies were experimenting with igniting the powder charge from the front. What they did was make a tube, threaded on one end which was screwed into a threaded primer flash hole. The tube extended up into the powder column for some distance and when fired, the flash from the primer travelled through the tube to the front of the charge. Some rather elaborate claims were made for velocity increases....which appear to have been fired over a typewriter. As gr said, there was no ballistics justification for it. I want to remember that at one time some artillery shells actually used the concept but, artillery is a pretty big step out of my wheelhouse and I don't know if it actually occurred.
 
  • Like
Reactions: soonerfan66

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
I am content not needing to use fillers in my smokeless loads . You said it right sharps "you need to know what your doing " . The loads I use in my guns are from the manuals and work plenty good for me .We kind of got on a wabbit trail !!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
I forgot to talk about the gun show in OKC . Was not a lot going on there . Took about 10 minutes to walk thru . Saw 1 big jug of powder (wasn't H4895) and a few 100 count pistol primers . Needless to say left empty handed .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
On another forum someone sent me an article from am older reloading magazine on reduced loads with IMR4895 powder . I loaded up some test roads today with the round nose and spitzer bullets I have . The round nosed bullets with a charge of 33.9-33.6 stayed close to the 34.0 charge group size but 33.5-33.0 began opening up the group size greatly . I didn't load many spitzer test loads but the ones I did were no better then my earlier test loads . Think I said was planning to try the spitzer in the higher range to see if that helps the group size or not but that will be on another day this week ..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
I wouldn't push a '91 Mauser very hard, it ain't a '98.
 
  • Like
Reactions: soonerfan66

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
Your on the ball sharps , thanks . No offence but I try to double check info I am given and in my reloading bible book it doesn't say ANYTHING about dangers with the 7x57 round , it does have some info on other rounds used by older milsurps rifles . But always trying to be a careful person when reloading I checked further and on the computer found a few different times it saying "the lower end of the suggested loads given should be considered the MAXIMUM loads used in 91,93,95 Mauser actions ." It was saying not all reloading books give this bit of need to know info . Just shows even going by the "book" do your research very good . I know the 98 action is considered one of the top actions and had heard stories about the steel used by the Spanish was good but not as good as the steel used by Mauser in their factories and the changes in the bolt designs . Think it mat be time to invest in a new updated reloading book !
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,251 Posts
I own and shoot.....well, mostly old rifles from the 1870's up to about the beginning of WWII. Obviously the later ones, the between the wars rifles, Mausers, Mannlicher/Schoenauers, drillings and double rifles and single shots, are pretty much capable of shooting about any load recommended in a manual. Even so, unless the bore is a bit rough or worn they get fed a diet of reduced, cast bullet loads. The older stuff, it gets fed an old man diet of mostly reduced, cast bullet loads in them, in deference to their age. I have a few that fall into the same era as the '91 Mauser which is what prompted the post. In particular a very nice 1889 Haenel/Rasch in 9 X 57. The bottom rifle in the top picture and the top rifle in the bottom picture.

I have always been able to find a load that shot to the original sights or, only needed a front sight change, save one. My Husqvarna rolling block we had to mill off quite a bit of the front ramp and cut a dovetail for a new front sight to get it on with its preferred load.

P1010057 (2).JPG



P1010060.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: soonerfan66

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,328 Posts
I want to remember that at one time some artillery shells actually used the concept but, artillery is a pretty big step out of my wheelhouse and I don't know if it actually occurred.
Sorry for posting a bit off topic but it did occur in artillery shells, My Uncle Ernie was a Major in the Marine Corps and he had a fairly large casing from an artillery round by his front door he used for an umbrella holder, the primer used a tube nearly as long as the case that had holes in it near it's top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sharps4590

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,727 Posts
How is the minimum load figured for a round being developed ? Why I am asking this you might be wondering ? When testing loads for my 1891 Mauser in 7mm in IMR4895 I started shooting from highest to lowest 38.0gr to 34.0gr . Normally I start lowest to highest . And as normal the lowest one was the most accurate . And when shooting from 38.0 down the accuracy of course was getting better and better . The grouping at 34.0gr is very nice but still some room for improvement . Yes I know my quirks while shooting and the rifle itself factors in . As long as there is enough of a charge to get the bullet down range what or are there any dangers to loading below the suggested minimum load because I would like to try 33gr to maybe 30gr test loads to see if the accuracy would still improve more .
I down loaded some 7mm Rem mag years ago to blow out some dented shoulders. Couple grans below max and boy did they recoil! It was explained to me there wasn't enough powder in the case and the primer flash jumped the powder and burned from the front back. I don't know if that's right or not but It was many years before I tried case's not pretty well full again. Once I started shooting case bullet's in a rifle I think I figured out how to avoid that. In my 308 I use a very small chg of Red Dot and on top of the powder I stuff a quarter sheet of toilet paper. Works just fine. I would think if I was told the right reason for heavy recoil in that old 7mm mag, the same thing would stop the problem. Back then I was told not to point the rifle down with a round in it. In fact best to point it up in the air and bring it down slowly to shoot. Was told that will keep the powder up to the flash hole and the flash can't jump the powder!
 
21 - 40 of 55 Posts
Top