benny hill Posted July 10, 2005 Share Posted July 10, 2005 It was a low powder charge that did it. Almost cannot get a double in a super case w/o spilling over but a low charge is easy enough. The powder did not burn down the barrel but all at once & ka-boom. Have seen over charged cases fired & bulged barrels. This is instant detnation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Hello Benny, I'm interested in the low powder charge theory because I can't find any documented tests that were able to duplicate the detonation theory. Can you point us to any tests by the powder companies, gun companies, proof houses that have documented cases? Nolan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Couldn't it have been a squib? I have had 2 squibs in my revolver and both times I didn't realize it in time and put another bullet right behind it. Both times, there were 2 holes in the target... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnRodriguez Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Couldn't it have been a squib? I have had 2 squibs in my revolver and both times I didn't realize it in time and put another bullet right behind it. Both times, there were 2 holes in the target... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The one big safety factor in squibing in a revo, especially if you put on behinded it is that the gases have a place to vent at the cylinder gap. I've done it 3 time is my 38 super and did it yesterday in my 625, did it on a middle target of 3 where I was a full speed pulling the trigger, was never able to stop, scared the hell out of the ro, I just keep going tru the stage, if he stopped me I get a reshoot. semi-auto don't have that venting luxury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoNsTeR Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 I got curious about the manufacturer since everyone was dancing around the name... It's obviously a Schuemann, no one else stamps their hoods "DANGER EXHAUST PORTS READ MANUAL". And while we're talking about it, I firmly believe detonation in small pistol cases with fast pistol powders is a myth. Put a little bit of 2400 in a .30-06 case, yeah ok maybe. A little bit of 7625 in a .38 Super case, notta chance. If the phenomenon were real, it would be documented in every reloading manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny hill Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Ever seen the top strap & cylinder gone from a colt single action where they were useing a very lite charge of powder in cowboy shooting w/o a filler. Ka-Boom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 The patent number, clearly visible in one of the shots thanks to some really incredible close up photography (what camera?), <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Believe it or not, it's just a Sony Cybershot Model No. DSC-100 5.1 Megapixels. It's got a few *cool* features that the other models didn't offer. Zeiss Lens, Variable zoom, different close up settings and you can manually set f/stops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Ever seen the top strap & cylinder gone from a colt single action where they were useing a very lite charge of powder in cowboy shooting w/o a filler. Ka-Boom. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> After reading the article in Shoot! magazine on two bullets in one case I'm skeptical of the claims of the lite charge theory. Considering the number of rounds fired by Cowboy Action Shooters and PPC shooters with very light powder charges versus the number of guns blown up I would put my money on 2 bullets in one case. The Light Powder Detonation theory sounds more like a good CYA because it only appears AFTER the gun goes Ka-Boom. Nolan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 (edited) I got curious about the manufacturer since everyone was dancing around the name... It's obviously a Schuemann, no one else stamps their hoods "DANGER EXHAUST PORTS READ MANUAL". And while we're talking about it, I firmly believe detonation in small pistol cases with fast pistol powders is a myth. Put a little bit of 2400 in a .30-06 case, yeah ok maybe. A little bit of 7625 in a .38 Super case, notta chance. If the phenomenon were real, it would be documented in every reloading manual. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> were not talking about fast pistol powders. moderate to slower burning powders are used in major 38 supers... what is supposed to happen is the low powder charge, the primer blasts past the powder(lighting some or very little of the powder charge) dislogding the bullet from the case. while the bullet is stuck in the barrel the rest of the powder is supposed to light all at once, causing nasty pressure spike. IT IS A PROBLEM AND IT IS REAL. this is directly from the hodgdon powder companys website. H110 Loads should not be reduced more than 3%. Reduce H110 Loads 3% and work up from there. H110 if reduced too much will cause inconsistent ignition. In some cases it will lodge a bullet in the barrel, causing a hazardous situation (Barrel Obstruction). This may cause severe personal injury or death to users or bystanders. now thats specific to that powder but take 3n37 and only put a partial charge in the case...not just 3% but say 50%...i bet it can(and does) happen. again, sorry about that gun...if you ever find out what really caused the KB, let us know. Edited July 12, 2005 by harmongreer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul B Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 In the first picture, take a look at the base of the forward locking lug. Is that an impending crack or flaw? Was it pre or post KB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 what is supposed to happen is the low powder charge, the primer blasts past the powder(lighting some or very little of the powder charge) dislogding the bullet from the case. while the bullet is stuck in the barrel the rest of the powder is supposed to light all at once, causing nasty pressure spike. You would think so, but in reality with a fast powder almost all the powder burns before the bullet leaves the case anyway, especially with light loads. As I read it, the H110 warning is so you don't stick a bullet in the barrel and then shoot another one, not have a powder detonation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Monster is right. "And while we're talking about it, I firmly believe detonation in small pistol cases with fast pistol powders is a myth. Put a little bit of 2400 in a .30-06 case, yeah ok maybe. A little bit of 7625 in a .38 Super case, notta chance. If the phenomenon were real, it would be documented in every reloading manual. " Its a theory. Call it a myth if you want. It is NOT supported by evidence and has NOT been demonstrated as a repeateable phenomenon. There is NO evidence that anyone has pointed to & I will reconsider if someone can point to credible, supporting evidence. As for Hodgdon's statement, this is another way of stating what they wrote: "If you put too small of an amount of X powder (does not matter what powder) in a case, a bullet could lodge in the barrel. Then, if you attempt to fire another round, the barrel will likely rupture." I do not see how Hodgdon's warning has anything to do with the "powder level below flash hole" theory. Here is Hodgdon's statement: "H110 Loads should not be reduced more than 3%. Reduce H110 Loads 3% and work up from there. H110 if reduced too much will cause inconsistent ignition. In some cases it will lodge a bullet in the barrel, causing a hazardous situation (Barrel Obstruction). This may cause severe personal injury or death to users or bystanders In any event, if there are scientific studies to support the theory, lets see them. As for the cause, Shooter Grrrl has ruled out reloading tool operator error. How about: - possible build up of fowling in the barrel raising pressure? -could a defective primer contain too much priming compound & thus raise pressure? -what about an oversize bullet - as if a .356" or similar-profile .357" was accidentally included in the box of bulk .355" I assume you used? One would think such a round would not chamber properly, but what if? What if you are using 115s & one of the 124s was accidentally mixed in & loaded over the same charge of powder? I think that 115s & 124s look similar. Possible? Regards, D.C. Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Who has some suggestions as to what they would like to see tested, recommended powders should only be those that are commonly used in the caliber to make major. If some reasonable recommendations can be made I will step forward and be a guinea pig so to speak. (probably against my better judgement, but oh well it is in the name of science). Suggestions for as controlled test as possible. I have a 38 Super or a .40 Barrel I am willing to sacrifice. The slide is already cracked so I need a new one anyways, afterall we are looking for barrel failure first. Alan (and no I am not mikey, I will not try everything) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooter Grrl Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 Duuuude, YOU ROCK See if you can get the low powder charge idea to work out (I don't think you're gonna be able to duplicate it!) We use 115gr Zero JHP's with N350, small rifle primers and new starline brass. I'm deliberately leaving out the powder measure! Start at 4gr I guess and work your way down from there. That's about half of what the standard is for 38 super. We visually check every case for powder, and are so anal about it, we toss the ones that we think we didn't look at! I can image 1 or 2 grains low, but not much more than that! But instant detonation is exactly the best way to describe what happened. With the exception that the bullet left the barrel and hit the target - no obstructions at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Thanks Kath for the data, It will probably be a week before I get it tested. My range is hosting some clay bird event this weekend. (I do not understand why you would hunt birds you can't eat. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolan Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Thanks Kath for the data,It will probably be a week before I get it tested. My range is hosting some clay bird event this weekend. (I do not understand why you would hunt birds you can't eat. ) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> WAIT! Let's let "Mythbusters" do it. I bet they're crazy enough (sorry Alan) to try it and they sure are better funded! Nolan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Nolan, I might use this as a project to try and get to work with those guys. What better way to build a resume. Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 Submit it on their forums: http://community.discovery.com/1/OpenTopic...04&f=2991937776 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 RTR, Why should we let Mythbusters have all of the fun. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 RTR,Why should we let Mythbusters have all of the fun. Alan I highly doubt they would do this one on their show, since the number of people who care about this myth is limited even within the already small shooting community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuildSF4 Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Still curious was there any "bulging" or "plastic deformation" of the barrel where the break occurred? If not I still believe it is a barrel issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling White Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Testing the theory is a great idea. HOWEVER, the barrel maker and the gun smith would need to duplicate the efforts of the first. Any other configuration may not provide the same result. $.02 ps...might be a good time to invest in a ransom rest! I hate it when things go "boom" in my hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Meek Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 Sterling, I was hoping you would fire the gun. After all I am loading the test ammo. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling White Posted July 13, 2005 Share Posted July 13, 2005 hmmmm One "KABOOM" in this life is enufff for me thank you very much! I'll help construct the robotic arm that holds and shoots the gun! It sux when you loose your gun to some type of failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rishii Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 this past weekend, a guy on the range KB a 1903 springfield. blew the top of the receiver clean off, the bolt about 2 feet back, and a 1 inch hole in the roof , I think NASA is still tracking that one. he's ok, just a few pieces of schrapnel in the face and arms. he is an expreanced re-loader and shooter, but he had a keg of W748, and a keg of tight group near the bench, anyone care to guess what 50 grains of TIGHTGROUP in a 30-06 case will do. 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