Noise/flash question

[RCJ]

One of the complaints I usually see about 16" AR-15's and other carbines is that they have louder report and more flash than their full-length counterparts. I figure this must be caused by excess powder burning after the bullet is launched and wanted to know if it was as simple to fix as using a faster-burning powder than typically used by the factory rifle ammo.

[Sevens]

There are folks here MUCH more qualified than I am to answer this one, but I'll share my thoughts anyhow, and let them mop up when they get here.

YES, you could build some loads using a different powder and charge that might indeed give you somewhat less flash & blast. However, you must still stick to published loads using any of the proper rifle propellants. You can't simply come up with a load using some ultra-fast pistol powder and experiment. If you tried that, you would most definitely grenade the receiver of your AR. Guarenteed. Fast burning (pistol type) powders reach peak pressures (and beyond) phenomenally quick when compared to rifle powders.

If you did go ahead and stick with suitable powders for the .223, you'd still have a limit to how much you could reduce any of the loads because of the gas-op semi-auto nature of the rifle. Lighter loads might flash less, but then they might not reliably feed and operate the rifle.

This isn't an easy problem to fix. You've got a 50,000 CUP round letting loose in there. Toning it down isn't going to be easy.

[Scorch]

One of the complaints I usually see about 16" AR-15's and other carbines is that they have louder report and more flash than their full-length counterparts

Yes, depending on the powders used. Military ammo uses ball powder and is designed to be fired in 20" barrels, but you can load different powders for your own use. From my experience, IMR4198 or IMR3031 will give you a much reduced muzzle signature, but they are not as easy to load as ball powders.

[RCJ]

Thanks for the replies, it hadn't occurred to me that reaching max pressure faster would damage the action, very interesting.

[Sevens]

On a somewhat recent episode of the Guns & Ammo television show (it airs on the Outdoor Network, if you get it), they did one of their "torture tests" on exactly this subject.

YES, their "torture tests" are usually pretty ignorant little segments... they drag rifles through mud, shoot handguns under water... probably the dumbest one I've seen was when they dropped some nameless polymer pistol in to a concrete mixer with a load of dry gravel. They are pretty much silly little segments.

But they did one that oughta be a huge wake-up call to reloaders. They took a .300 Win Mag case and dumped a full load of Bullseye pistol powder in to it, then seated the bullet. Bullseye has long been known as one of the fastest (if not THE fastest) burning powders available. I myself use it in 9mm, .45 and .38 Special. 4.4 grains of Bullseye makes a nice shooting load behind a 200 grains LSWC in a .45-- but 60+ grains of it in a .300 Win Mag case?

Anyhow, they loaded the round in to a T/C Encore Pro Hunter and strapped it down and pulled the trigger via a string and it blew the top half of the chamber clean off and turned the brass case in to shrapnel. Cracked the synthetic fore end and sent a 3-inch long chunk of metal off the top of the barrel flying about 15 feet, and bulged the sides of the receiver.

[brickeyee]

But they did one that oughta be a huge wake-up call to reloaders. They took a .300 Win Mag case and dumped a full load of Bullseye pistol powder in to it, then seated the bullet.

Sounds as dumb as their other stunts.
A full case of bullseye in a rifle cartridge is very ikely to blow soething apart.

Only the truly dumb need to perform the stunt to understand why.

Without even considering they probably could not find a single loading manual that lists bullseye for a rifle cartridge, especially as large as a .300 Win Mag.

[The Lovemaster]

OT, but the thing I hate the most about those segments is how they destroy the gun sometimes. Must be nice to have guns donated to you that you can destroy.

[TimRB]

"Thanks for the replies, it hadn't occurred to me that reaching max pressure faster would damage the action, very interesting."

Another problem that can come up with gas-operated rifles is using powder that is too SLOW. If the powder being used is slower than the proper powder, you can have a situation where powder is still being burned up as the bullet passes the gas port in the barrel. (The rifle designers expected the powder to be fully burned up by then.)

This causes the port pressure to be too high, possibly bollixing up your rifle's moving parts.

Tim

[RCJ]

This causes the port pressure to be too high, possibly bollixing up your rifle's moving parts.

So I guess the moral of the story is autoloaders are tricky to make atypical loads for without damaging the weapon. Although, while I hadn't thought of all these complexities, filling a large case with powder of any type without consulting a reloading manual wouldn't have occurred to me as a good thing to try.

[TimRB]

"Although, while I hadn't thought of all these complexities, filling a large case with powder of any type without consulting a reloading manual wouldn't have occurred to me as a good thing to try."

Not sure what the attitude is all about, but I would say that for a gas gun I would not trust even a reloading manual outright unless the loads given were specifically for the AR15.

Tim

[RCJ]

Sorry, the eye roll wasn't at you but at the silly things that TV shows will do; I really do appreciate the feedback and tips.

[Sevens]

It seems that this show gets a lot of annoyed remarks in & around shooting and gun forums. IMO, it's because the TV show caters to a somewhat more novice audience than most of the people who would spend time participating in gun discussion forums, so we may feel a bit "above" some of the things they do on the show, whether they attempt to entertain or to inform.

I say that most of the torture tests they do attempt to entertain and don't do much to inform. However, I will not condemn them with a blanket-- I've seen some of those segments that attempt to answer questions that I've wondered about myself.

For certain, I've never cared what happens to a S&W M&P when it's churned in a cement mixer. I think that's ludicrous. I also steadfastly refuse to cry or moan in ANY way about the "loss of a firearm." It's easy for me to separate a turn of the century Colt SAA from a fresh-off-the-line M&P that's ugly to begin with and is no bigger loss than some drunk driver wrapping a new Chevy Colbalt around a telephone pole. I don't put modern tools on any kind of a pedestal, especially ugly but functional polymer defense pistols. There's still an M&P out there for anyone who cries over the one they wrecked on TV. And if enough people cry over that one and run out to buy one, S&W will make even more... thus, the segment that wrecked one functioned to create 2,000 more of them than otherwise would have been built. See this logic?

Another "torture test" that I didn't get much from was when they dragged an M1A through mud and then fired it, or put a small can of black powder next to a SOCOM to simulate some roadside IED.

An example of a torture test that did interest me: when they dropped a 20 gauge shell in to a 12 gauge Benelli, then dropped a 12 behind it and pulled the trigger. I don't know if it sent the right message-- the Benelli never blinked. Perhaps they should have grabbed an old NEF single shot or some Ted Williams special.

But this one with the .300 WM and Bullseye powder did make sense to me.

Call me crazy, but I believe there are people out there dumb enough to do silly things without learning how to properly do them. Pouring "gun powder" in to a piece of brass and shoving a bullet in there? I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that Bubba has done this before and will again.

If some kid or odd fellow who lacks common sense sees this test and learns even a little bit from it-- gets the idea that you can't simply put powder in to a brass case with a live primer and put a bullet in there and safely pull the trigger, then I think it does inform.

I would think most-- heck, ALL folks who reload ammo know full well that you don't just stick any powder in to any load. But beyond the idea that it's wrong to do so, who here has ever dumped 60 grains of Bullseye in to a .300 WM case and pulled the trigger? You know it's a foolish move, but were you sure it would blow a new, modern, and VERY strong firearm in to shrapnel?

Texas Sea Ray, a regular in this forum told of a recent incident at one of his local ranges where some goof KB'd a modern pistol... a Sig, maybe? Something in .40 S&W. At some point after the blown pistol and the medical attention to the shooter's hand was taken care of, some of the "offending" rounds were taken apart and learned to have a ridiculous over charge of whatever powder the "reloader" was using. Most evidence pointed to the idea that he simply scooped a bunch of powder in to the brass and "made some ammo."

These people exist. God help you if they occupy the booth next to you. If the same guy watches a T/C Encore get blown to bits by the tall fat guy and the short fat guy on G&A TV, and actually reads a load manual before "makin' some ammo!" and keeps himself from grenading a rifle or pistol, then the world is a better place.

These are my opinions.

[RCJ]

If the same guy watches a T/C Encore get blown to bits by the tall fat guy and the short fat guy on G&A TV, and actually reads a load manual before "makin' some ammo!" and keeps himself from grenading a rifle or pistol, then the world is a better place.

I see where your coming from. I guess it's easy to forget that a lot of (if not most) gun owners don't study them as much as I do (it's either a hobby or an obsession, depending on if you ask me or my wife ).