Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Smokeless powder safety - warning graphic content (hand injury)

  1. #21
    Has too much time on their hands

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smallgamer View Post
    I am a new traditional MLer. I have never given thought to this. Thank you for the heads up gentlemen. Pete, you mention in your post that this unlikely occurrence can be alleviated by running a damp patch down the barrel before reloading. Do you follow this practice personally as well?
    To be honest - no, I don't do it every time. As I said - it is such a 1 in a million possibility that I don't see the need. If I'm shooting for a score I do but that really is for accuracy not safety.
    Member of the National Firearms Association (NFA).

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #22
    Needs a new keyboard

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Thanks for the clarification Pete.
    Youíre lucky to have the gear you already have. Some people wish they had stuff as nice as the stuff you think isnít good enough. - Bill Heavey

  4. #23
    Needs a new keyboard

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rcoulas View Post
    That didn't go off while loading. The person used a volumetric measure for smokeless powder and probably thought the grain weight and volume where the same. That is what I get from the story. OUCH!
    Quote Originally Posted by rcoulas View Post
    If you re read the information it has nothing to do with ember in the barrel or the charge going off while loading. The person used a black powder volumetric powder measure to measure a smokeless load. He could have had double or triple charged the rifle depending on the powder used, that is why a scale is recommended. Then the gun was fired and the barrel burst causing the injuries. Not sure how the hot ember idea got started but its about using the proper method to measure the powder.
    Just for the heck of it, I decided to see how much 100 grains/volume of 4759 (the powder I use in my Savage) weighed. I came up with 82 grains by weight on my scale. Almost double the recommended load. I would not want to be anywhere near that gun going off.
    Last edited by delmer; February 16th, 2014 at 05:20 PM.
    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." Ernest Benn

  5. #24
    Apprentice

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Delmer

    No one should want to be around a double load but the 10ML-II is designed to handle such a load without rupturing. Yes the bore (lands) will be damaged requiring replacement. The barrel is rated as follows;
    Yield strength over 80,000psi.
    Tensile strength of at least 118,000psi.

    When the 10ML-II was first introduced a promotion was done using a double load fired by Ron Coburg president of Savage to demonstrate the reliability of the smokeless10ML-II.
    Now if there was a double load and the ramrod left in the bore that would be another story.


    Ed

  6. #25
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikePal View Post
    I won't show you any pictures of a chainsaw accident then, you may never use one them either....how about knives, do you have any in the kitchen
    LOL.Here's the kind of luck I have when I mess with explosives. Picture two ten year olds messing with a junior chemistry set mixing this and that in my buddy's Dad's garage. Nothing happens so that's no fun. We leave to play down the street and hear a big WHUMP. We turn around toward the garage in time to watch a garage door go rolling across the lawn. We weren't allowed to play with a chemistry set,anymore.
    I like my firearms like Liberals like voters-----undocumented.

  7. #26
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ET1 View Post
    No one should want to be around a double load but the 10ML-II is designed to handle such a load without rupturing.
    The only case of a "Blown Up" 10ML-II was from a double load....confirmed.

    By now, you can probably guess what is coming. Bob completely loaded his already completely loaded Savage. Down went another 43 grains of SR4759, down went another 250 grain SST. Sure, Bob had a witness mark but it doesn't do you much good if you don't use it. Bob also didn't notice that his loading rod didn't go down as much as normal, as it was left protruding the additional combined length of the extra powder charge column, the extra sabot, and the extra 250 grain SST. Bob quickly primed the gun and fired, and the gun came apart.

    The chocolate layer cake load that Bob constructed consisted of seven components: primer, powder, sabot, bullet, powder, sabot, bullet. You have to break just about every rule in the book to get there, but it happened. Using information from Hartmut Broemel of Babenhausen, Germany, and Johan Loubser of Western Powders, I ran the numbers to get a rough idea of the peak pressure potential of that load that happened 2 milliseconds after Bob hit the Accu-Trigger. The maximum pressure potential of that load exceeds 316,000 PSI, roughly nine times the pressure of any Savage recommended load. That is of course more than ample pressure to destroy any commercially available shoulder-fired weapon I can think of. The SAAMI MAP for the .50 BMG, for example, is 54,000 PSI, with nothing running higher than 65,000 PSI MAP that I can think of.
    Arte et marte (By Skill and by Fighting)...The RCEME motto

  8. #27
    Apprentice

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Mike Pal

    Interesting read. The only person I have ever heard mention the name Hartmut Broemel is Randy Wakeman. He is proclaimed as an expert with loads that are directly exposed to primer ignition. The Savage is of different design which allows the use of powders that are normally found in pistols or smaller cartridges and not considered for larger cartridges.

    Letís look at the load itself constructed as such mentioned.
    Primer initially only ignites 43gr 4759 because the second half of powder load is separated by sabot and bullet. Once pressure builds forcing the sabot cup to expand it seals off the bore for hot gas propagation beyond sabot.
    So the first question is can the second powder charge be even ignite?
    Is the calculated pressure presented based on 43gr 4759 or 86gr 4759?
    Keep in mind that the powder loads are not combined but separated.
    A proper single load only generates around 35,000psi. Yes pressure buildup to peak is not linear.

    Letís look at the additional weight of powder, sabot and bullet. Powder 43grns, sabot approximately 11grns and bullet 250grns. Combined weight is 304grns almost equivalent to a 300grn bullet. Now there have been stories of people shooting their ramrod out of the bore and their weight is definitely higher than 304grns. Worst case scenario is damaged bore but not any rupture.

    Add to the fact that I mentioned in another thread that I have unintentionally experienced a double load resulting only in a damaged bore. Even though it was unintentional I still take full responsibility for what happened because it resulted from what I did.

    Individuals like Toby Bridges and Randy Wakeman can proclaim what they want falling on their recognized status. Many others who donít have a specific working knowledge in this area are relying on what they present. Funny how my findings donít always add up to 100% of what they convey that raises additional questions. Not saying Iím an expert but sometimes what I read doesnít add up to what Iím experiencing.

    As to what level of safety a person wishes to employ that is derived from their reasoning and understanding, excess or additional is always good.

    In the picture of the damaged 10ML-II I saw no opened sites as they appeared to be removed. My big unanswered question did the rear sight threaded hole have a replacement screw installed? Leaving an exposed threaded hole that is now unsupported in the area near max pressure canít be a good thing and may alter the strength of the bore.


    Ed

  9. #28
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ET1 View Post
    Let’s look at the load itself constructed as such mentioned.
    Primer initially only ignites 43gr 4759 because the second half of powder load is separated by sabot and bullet. Once pressure builds forcing the sabot cup to expand it seals off the bore for hot gas propagation beyond sabot.
    So the first question is can the second powder charge be even ignite?
    That was my first thought as well Ed.....why would the second powder charge ignite if it was sitting above the 'sealed' sabot....I would have guessed it would have travelled as a package and been dumped out the end of the barrel. If however he was using a stiff cupped sabot the flame may have snuck thru the bore grooves or powder from the upper load may have stuck in the groove and trailed behind as the sabot moved across and provided a path for the ignition.

    The fact that the shooter has 'confessed' his errors and substantiates the story I tend to lean toward believing it happened as presented.


    Quote Originally Posted by ET1 View Post
    Individuals like Toby Bridges and Randy Wakeman can proclaim what they want falling on their recognized status. Many others who don’t have a specific working knowledge in this area are relying on what they present. Funny how my findings don’t always add up to 100% of what they convey that raises additional questions. Not saying I’m an expert but sometimes what I read doesn’t add up to what I’m experiencing.


    An articulate way of saying " I think he's full of chit" ..LOL....

    I hear you, but I have taken to accepting some things at face value due to the constrictions of brevity in articles that are published for internet consumption. I'm sure if you were to ask for clarification on a point of concern, the author would be more than happy to provide more information.
    Arte et marte (By Skill and by Fighting)...The RCEME motto

  10. #29
    Apprentice

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Mike Pal

    Iím not politely saying they are full of it but the way the facts are being presented and conclusions being derived donít fully corroborate leaving unanswered questions.
    I once considered TB & RW authorities of muzzle loading when I first started out. But my goal also was to learn as much as possible for the workings of a muzzle loader especially smokeless muzzle loading and Iím still learning.
    Iím not trying to persuade anyone to change their way of thinking or choice of acceptance but when something doesnít totally ring true from my learned perspective I feel I need to voice it just like others for additional awareness. How that info is accepted by others is up to them to decide.


    Ed

  11. #30
    Has too much time on their hands

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikePal View Post
    That was my first thought as well Ed.....why would the second powder charge ignite if it was sitting above the 'sealed' sabot....I would have guessed it would have travelled as a package and been dumped out the end of the barrel.
    I was thinking about that too. Why would 2 loads ignite at once?

    Got me to thinking of the "Roman Candle" muzzle loading rifles of the 1800's. They'd have several loads one on top of the other and rather than all go off at once they'd fire like a - well, Roman Candle. www.scotwars.com/equip_firearms2.htm

    Also there were firearms made (in the 1800's) with multiple hammers that would fire one superposed load after another.
    Member of the National Firearms Association (NFA).

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •