RJH Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 Serious question here, are the 160 grain loads that much softer than a 147? Seems like a 147 would make minor easily and have plenty of published data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterthefish Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 Serious question here, are the 160 grain loads that much softer than a 147? Seems like a 147 would make minor easily and have plenty of published data. Not that much softer, but they fall into the cylinder better. Making minor with the 929 is a bit of a pain - my ammo runs about 100+ FPS slower in my 929 than in any of my 5" autos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 Serious question here, are the 160 grain loads that much softer than a 147? Seems like a 147 would make minor easily and have plenty of published data. Not that much softer, but they fall into the cylinder better. Making minor with the 929 is a bit of a pain - my ammo runs about 100+ FPS slower in my 929 than in any of my 5" autos. The 100 fps thing is irritating... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 Serious question here, are the 160 grain loads that much softer than a 147? Seems like a 147 would make minor easily and have plenty of published data. A decent number of people, and 1 really really good one, are using 135's. The gun is so heavy I personally don't know that it objectively matters, its all what feel you like more than anything. I am using 160's out of habit and what I had more than any other factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted October 6, 2015 Share Posted October 6, 2015 I'm on the 147s just because I don't feel like messing around with a new bullet weight. This may change in the winter when my free time expands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 Going through old pics, here is the offcenter primer hit that went off... and the blast, notice the 1 oclock charge hole and the offcenter blast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AultGM Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 I've seen this happen many times in PPC guns shooting very light Bullseye loads with 148g Lead BBWC bullets. It was called "wave pressure" back in the 70's-80's, whereas, upon ignition, the burning charge would bounce back and forth in the case. I've seen entire cylinders peeled back from this phenomenon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterthefish Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 Going through old pics, here is the offcenter primer hit that went off... and the blast, notice the 1 oclock charge hole and the offcenter blast. Yeah - with a skipped chamber it made sense. I'm in Area 7 - with no more USPSA in RI I've been shooting local steel matches at Wallum Lake and some other clubs. No desire to get an MA permit so NH is really the next closest option. Considering trying to start a club but my range is pretty fuddy, and I have a feeling even if they BOD agreed and we got started, they'd call it quits after seeing a match in real life. TMI... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ty Hamby Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I just had the same thing happen in my 929. Blown cylinder in the same exact spot. I am loading a 165 X-treme behind 3.1 gr. of titegroup. ImageUploadedByTapatalk1442868888.352635.jpg Wow! Two gun blown up now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallisticianX Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 I just came across this post. After reading the theories of why the poor mans cylinder split I can tell you a couple of things. A squib load lodged in the barrel of a 929 WILL NOT blow the cylinder (assuming of course the cylinder was in spec). I can attest to this as it happened to me with a 929 with 9mm 135 gr 127pf loads at the ICORE NER in 2015. A batch of cases were not holding size (springback) and bullets were working themselves loose and sometimes falling free of the case into the cylinder throat. I found out latter what was going on! Anyway one of which when fired never ignited the spilled out powder fully and got jammed in the barrel. Unknowing at the moment, thinking I had a bad round/primer I pulled off another shot. It had a louder boom than normal but I continued to shoot the stage. When scoring the target where I thought was just an innocent click had 7 holes in it instead of the 6 that went boom. One of those holes was a tumbling tear. The moonclip had 7 cases with primer hits and all missing bullets! ....The 929 ran the rest of the day and most of this year without any problems other than its usual sticky extraction. As far as detonation goes, its a long argued phenomenon. One I believe is possible but the conditions are specific and rare. WHen I was 21, and time on my hands I had an old beater revolver that was not worth the scrap price of its weight. Using the precise method of a 2 jaw vise vise and a string around a corner I loaded 38 specials with Red Dot, Bullseye, Unique, & 231/HP38 in .2 gr increments below the starting loads until I got squibs. with 158 LSWC. No detonation just some bunny farts and squibs. I know this is not the ultimate argument solver but it showed its not something that can "sure as shit" happen every time you load up sub starting loads. I will say that detonation is a real and existing problem with deteriorated powder. This I have experienced with the reddish dust that forms on bad powder. In my case IMR 4350 in an '06, A mauser action that will never be the same. So I am not convinced this cylinder was the result of detonation or a squib. My feelings are double charging, a bad batch of Ti that was the wrong alloy (ie alpha alloy instead of alpha-beta alloy), manufacturers rely on certifications from material suppliers so it is possible of a mix up. Or a cylinder that was never heat treated after it was annealed for machining. Titanium is a hard material to work with and is easily screwed up. With S&W the way they have been in recent years not only is a manufacturer defect just "possible" its "probable" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterthefish Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 My feelings are double charging, a bad batch of Ti that was the wrong alloy (ie alpha alloy instead of alpha-beta alloy), manufacturers rely on certifications from material suppliers so it is possible of a mix up. Or a cylinder that was never heat treated after it was annealed for machining. Titanium is a hard material to work with and is easily screwed up. With S&W the way they have been in recent years not only is a manufacturer defect just "possible" its "probable" .A double charge was at fault in the first case, and likely the second. The probability of a materials defect in an S&W revolver is much closer to 0 (by orders of magnitude) than the probability of a double charge.Don't confuse errors made by $12/ hour assemblers with manufacturing defects that you clearly have no experience with. 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