dajarrel Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Is there any truth to the rumor that too low a powder charge weight can be as dangerous as too high? I have checked the FAQ's and searched for info and haven't been able to find any information. Truth or Old wives tale??? Thanks in advance, dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 dj, I do believe it's true, but in this thread more authoritative voices say it's only BS. I guess the decision is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 DJ, This is more critical with specific powders and certain calibers. I have never experienced it myself but have heard from others that have. The powders I have been warned about were Win 296 and H-110. These are both magnum pistol or small rifle powders. When these powders are downloaded to a certain point they can "detonate" and destroy the firearm. I communicated with the VihtaVouri folks and they claim that their powders do not exhibit those quirks. Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogmaDog Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 In addition to what was said in the thread Skywalker linked you to (thanks, Sky!), you can obviously go too low and get squib loads--not enough powder to push the bullet out of the barrel. Also, when start pushing the charge weight smaller and smaller, you probably will see increased variance in velocity, and more smoke/fouling when you shoot. Aside from those issues, I don't think low charge weights are dangerous. DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Many years ago we were experimenting with how slow of powder we could shoot with 10mm and .45 Open guns. We had a quantity 296 powder and my buddy tried loading it into a .45 just for kicks. He created a load which went like 550fps (155gr) and left a large portion of powder unburned in the barrel. There was just not enough pressure or heat to efficiently burn the powder completely. We did not fire any more with that powder. We ultimately ended up with WAP and a soft comfortable load. Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Low charges are "dangerous" only because: 1. You can double charge a case with little visual or physical indication that you have done so. However, stuff like Titegroup has this issue even with normal charges. 2. You can go so low as to make a squib load. There's just too many people shooting foofer loads for me to believe any of this "too low will blow up your gun" nonsense. As far as rifles go, a lot of the myth's true believers are loading on single stage presses - for which the true "danger" should be blatantly obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Suber Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 I think the warnings exist because of the danger of squibs. However, I have also been warned about low charges in 38 Special using Bullseye. It seemed that very low charges (used in bullseye shooting) caused a phenomenon called detonation. The "Theory" behind this is that the low charge of Bullseye powder (I think below 2.7 grains was the referenced charge) would cause the powder to lay flat on the side of the case when the pistol was leveled to be fired. When the primer was ignited, the flame would "jet" forward (because no powder was directly in its path) and bounce off of the back of the bullet. This would cause the powder to ingnite from the front to back and cause the pistols to blow-up (cyclinder failer). I have never witnessed this but I have read many articles on it. Supposedly, thats why a lot of people use filler materials when shooting light loads in long wall pistol cases. My findings with rifles and pistols is that loads that allow the powder to settle on the sides are less accurate than those which fill the cases and prevent "movement" of the powder. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipster Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 The "Theory" behind this is that the low charge of Bullseye powder (I think below 2.7 grains was the referenced charge) would cause the powder to lay flat on the side of the case when the pistol was leveled to be fired. When the primer was ignited, the flame would "jet" forward (because no powder was directly in its path) and bounce off of the back of the bullet. This would cause the powder to ingnite from the front to back and cause the pistols to blow-up (cyclinder failer). Jack's Theory is correct, and I have witnessed the results of the theory. A well known bullseye shooter at our club had this very thing happen shooting 2.5grs of Bullseye powder and some 158 gr lead swc .38 special, it turned his custom S&W model 19 into scrap. Blew the top of the cyclinder and top strap off. Thank goodness for shooting glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogmaDog Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 I'm extremely skeptical of that theory. . .How do you know it wasn't just a double charge? DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipster Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 I'm extremely skeptical of that theory. . .How do you know it wasn't just a double charge?DD Even a Double charge would not be a significant enough of an overload to do what happened, maybe a triple charge but not a double, and I know the shooter well enough to know a triple charge would not happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Suber Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 I would have to agree that a double charge "likely" would not cause this condition. I believe a max load on a 148 grain HBWC with Bullseye is around 5.0 grns. A triple charge could do it. There has been a lot written about his theory. Again, this is why Bullseye shooters and some cowboy shooters use a filler for their weak loads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmitz Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 From: "Reloading Manual, second edition" Vihtavuori Oy, 1995: Placement of the Powder and the Effect of an almost empty case, page 42: ....quote: In an only partly filled case the powder evidently burns unevenly... ....quote: It is possible that under some circumstances this phenomenon-also known as low charge detonation-may occur also in a rifle/handgun caliber cartridge and the possibility of this should be kept in mind when developing loads. ....quote: A powder charge that fills the case up less than halfway should not be used for any application! People at Vihta know what they're talking about. And Jack you're right about the use of a filler. Overhere is used as well in low charge loads using Vectan BA-10 in .357MAG DVC, Henny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray S. Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Hi. You might find this info interesting: http://www.reloadammo.com/liteload.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted April 15, 2004 Share Posted April 15, 2004 Ray, That was definately interesting stuff, I would have to agree. It seems that it wouldn't apply to most IPSC shooters though. Most of the cases we use are not stretched out enough and our charges are not low enough to cause it. I think (as others have noted above) it happens with the longer (.38/.357) cases with ultra light loads. So go ahead production shooters, get as close to that 125pf as you want, no worries! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perf40 Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 If a low powder charge can supposedly create excessive pressure, how come none of the poweder manufactures can recreate this condition? I have called several manufactures and not one can create this condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L9X25 Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 While I have also heard powder manufacturers state that they have not been able to reproduce detonation, most reloading manuals caution against reducing many magnum loads (particularly using W296 and H-110). I serious doubt that they are woried about double charging W296 since it is usually 80-100% of case volume in most of the calibers I have loaded. Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray S. Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 Wouldn't it be difficult to purposely create an accident.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmitz Posted April 16, 2004 Share Posted April 16, 2004 If a low powder charge can supposedly create excessive pressure, how come none of the poweder manufactures can recreate this condition? I have called several manufactures and not one can create this condition. Until this condition happens, what then? DVC, Henny, read the VV manual! Just in case (you loose your hands or eyesight, good bye shooting! PS. Or like one of the German (Berlin) reloaders I met at Drummen's Custom Guns (NL) last saturday who lost eyesight while reloading on a 1050 with a stuck primer and continued forcing the handle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Kaboomm/hole in the roof (ca. 90 primers) Shit never happens??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmitz Posted April 17, 2004 Share Posted April 17, 2004 Silence???? Henny. C'one you unbelievers! In Dutch litteraly translated: "an accident is in a small corner"; in other words it happens out of nowhere! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g56 Posted April 18, 2004 Share Posted April 18, 2004 The story about detonation has been going around for a long time, there are a lot of theories about it, and I understand that nobody has been able to duplicate it under controlled conditions. Blown up guns, lots of theories, no proof available for any of it, so what's the truth? At this point I wonder if we will ever know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted April 18, 2004 Share Posted April 18, 2004 My understanding is that most reports of such things are from days long gone, which should also raise the question of the powder quality. However I can see how loading a LARGE magnum rifle case with a light load may allow the slow powder to light up "faster" as the primer flame licks the whole surface as opposed to the bottom of powder column. On the other hand, the same rifle shooter might have been trying to make a soft shooting plinking load for his super magnum T-rex wacker and and used some fast pistol powder of the very wrong kind. I can imagine the reaction "But it was a really light load. I normally use 110 grains of H-4831 and this time I only used 40 grains <mumble> of Clays </mumble>". My guess is the guys the make powder for a living have every interest to know if this possible or not (assuming the right powder). I'm sure they have tried every little ideas they could come up with, so I believe it is not a problem, or at least not with the correct modern powder. On the other hand if you want a load that low, maybe a different powder may serve you best. Vlad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajarrel Posted April 18, 2004 Author Share Posted April 18, 2004 Gee, What a can of worms!!!!! It is interesting to read the diffrent replies. Pros and Cons abound with warnings from powder manufacters kind of slim.( except for the VV bunch) I have been shooting V340 for my IPSC load and have recently started using titegroup. I am amazed at how little powder gets the job done. This is really what prompted the thread. 4.3 grains of Titegroup in a .45 casing sure doesn't look like much powder. Gun runs well and the bullet doesn't just fall out of the barrell so it should be ok, huh??? So I guess what we have here is a conundrum. Maybe someday the powder makers (or someone else with the resources) will actually be able to experiment enough to tell us one way or the other. Thanks for the replies, it has made interesting reading. dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted April 18, 2004 Share Posted April 18, 2004 Wouldn't it be difficult to purposely create an accident.? Not in this case. If the idea is that a particular charge weight of a particular powder in a particular case will detonate, you simply load a particular charge weight of a particular powder in a particular case and see if it detonates. If you think position of the powder in the case might be a contributing factor, you preposition the gun before firing to ensure the powder is in the position you want to test. All this has been done. No detonations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted April 18, 2004 Share Posted April 18, 2004 Maybe someday the powder makers (or someone else with the resources) will actually be able to experiment enough to tell us one way or the other. They already have. Many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted April 18, 2004 Share Posted April 18, 2004 quote: It is possible that under some circumstances this phenomenon-also known as low charge detonation-may occur also in a rifle/handgun caliber cartridge and the possibility of this should be kept in mind when developing loads.....quote: A powder charge that fills the case up less than halfway should not be used for any application! People at Vihta know what they're talking about. Do they? I'm reading some flat statements there and absolutely no supporting documentation or facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now