The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old September 8, 2000, 11:08 AM   #26
Gordon Hanson
Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 1999
Posts: 32
Clark,

The reactions from the above folks are instructive, aren't they? Cartridge and load development is something best left to the big guys, the professionals, rather than an individual.

Have we heard this line of reasoning before? Only from every anti-gun, anti-freedom organization in existence.

If the people on this board don't get it, what hope do we have to maintain our rights in a population the majority of which doesn't have any personal experience with firearms?

The people here instantly lept to a series of assumptions about what, how and where you are conducting your activities and instantly began prescribing remedies for you. Shades of Bill Clinton, eh? Did you notice that no one asked any questions before beginning the assault? Shades of Randy Weaver!

I thought Griz made the most pertinent comment, and it zipped though the thread like a neutrino through rock. I'd be shooting a .44 Special instead of a .44 Magnum if it weren't for Elmer Keith.

Keep on keeping on, buddy.

[This message has been edited by Gordon Hanson (edited September 08, 2000).]
Gordon Hanson is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 11:16 AM   #27
hagar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 2000
Location: Colombia, SC
Posts: 516
There are old reloaders, and there are bold reloaders. There are no old bold reloaders. Or put it another way, headspace is what you will experience when the slide comes rearward at your head at 300 miles per hour. Let us all know when you are going to the range next, so we can stay away from it. Get the message yet?

------------------
I don't have time for busy people
hagar is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 11:36 AM   #28
Dikyllis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 1999
Posts: 150
George Hill, *** happened to that hand!? I don't believe that is really the result of a KB..........enlighten me. I'd also like a path to the source. THANKS
Dikyllis is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 12:36 PM   #29
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: October 14, 1998
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,547
The photo is NOT of a KB - but VERY SIMILAR to some of the KB injuries that I have seen.

This photo was what I pulled up given 24 seconds of searching for this type of photo - and the source is as it says "MAXIMMAG.com"
George Hill is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 01:00 PM   #30
Bogie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2000
Location: Job hunting on the road...
Posts: 3,827
Clark, the _most_ important thing in a defensive load/weapon is reliability. Maybe the person will be able to get the first shot off from the super magnum whizbang, but they're gonna have fun with #2... Personally, I'd prefer a slightly underpowered cartridge, aimed well, than a slightly overpowered cartridge, with its attendant control problems...
Bogie is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 04:36 PM   #31
Contender
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 1998
Location: NY
Posts: 680
Wait a minute Clark,

Look at the way your original post is written.

The post is written exactly like a foolhardy, careless "experimenter" would write it.

Now, about 25 posts down, you state what you are really doing and go into further details about it. And then manage to chastise and belittle the rest of us for our "nasty" comments.

The next time you post something like that, try to be more specific instead of just posting that you are blowing up guns left and right. I doubt if anyone came away from that first post with any idea other than "this guys gonna blow his ass off".

Don't stop posting here. Just put your posts in a better context and explain better what you are involved in. We cannot read your mind. All we know is what you write.

I find amateur ballistics interesting also.

Don't go away mad now.

Contender is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 10:47 PM   #32
WalterGAII
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 7, 1999
Posts: 1,516
Immature, pubescent, adolescent nutsiness, plain and simple. (And I do mean simple!..minded, that is)
WalterGAII is offline  
Old September 8, 2000, 11:04 PM   #33
BIGR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2000
Location: Mountains
Posts: 1,246
Clark its been nice knowing you.Does your wife one have a good life insurance policy on you. Yes if are not blown up you might be disfigured the rest of your life.How far will this madness go???????????
BIGR is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 01:12 AM   #34
Johnny Guest
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: August 28, 1999
Location: North Texas
Posts: 4,116
Clark, if you choose to withdraw from this forum because some are concerned about both your well-being and TFL's liability exposure, so be it. But---Please be aware that this is not just a bunch of people going out of their way to tell Poor Clark what he can and cannot do. There are a number of genuinely concerned people, wishing you well to the extent that they will stick out their necks to caution you. There are also some others who are egging you on. Some are concerned about your inquiring mind, and I imagine that some just want to watch a good argument. I hate to think any of them are waiting to see if some nurse will come to TFL and send something like, "Clark can't write because he lost four fingers and his right eye."

Man, no one can tell you what to do with your guns and your loading stuff. They can urge you to take due care, to be organized in what you do, and to not be reckless. Please go back to the very top of this topic, one which you yourself opened. Please re- read the whole topic with some care. I am in complete agreement with Contender's reply of September 8, at 05:36 PM. The whole thing is exactly and precisely on point, especially the part about you leading us to believe you're blowing up guns right and left, in a spirit of careless abandon, and then, a little later on, claiming a lot of scientific motivation.

I can't say it any better than Contender did:

Don't stop posting here. Just put your posts in a better context and explain better what you are involved in. We cannot read your mind. All we know is what you write.

Clark, I believe some have suggested that you use a formal reporting format, and even furnished an example. Using this would add an air of scientific validity to your writings. Please, in the interests of some new guy who happens onto some of your stuff -- Show him that your scary loads are scientific experimentation, duly reported, and not something that the newbie should seek to outdo. Save some kid HIS eyesight.

Please-- Organize your reports of your experimentation so they can be given proper regard. If you are operating in a spirit of scientific curiosity, for the purpose of advancing the cause of firearms knowledge, then please write it up as such, and not as just, "Oh, boy, Billie Joe, look at this here! You ain't gonna BELIEVE whut I'm a-doing!"

And no one's saying it can't be FUN. Who's to say that Alfred Nobel didn't get his start just making stuff go BANG, and then later settle down, recording data and making real contributions to science?

Anyway, if you DO go away, some here will miss the excitement.

Johnny Guest
Moderator,
Handloading & Reloading Forum
The Firing Line

------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---
Johnny Guest is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 11:58 AM   #35
zot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 2, 1999
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 566
in clarks first post he says he has NO pressure testing equipment but last post says
he's a well educated enginer, do you wet your
fingerand hold it in the air close to the gun
as you pull the trigger?calculating blast and
pressure from shock wave of exploding gun?
your not for real and NOT even close to
Elmer Keith, no contribution to any NEW
cartridge development, your just blowing
guns up or ruining them for future use, I can't beleive your that wealthy to **** money
away,take the money you spend and give it to
a worthy cause.
zot is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 01:37 PM   #36
johnwill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 3,451
IMO, if Clark is put off by the comments here, after the tone of his message to start this thread, I doubt we'll be missing much by his absence.

His first post sounded like some 15 year old kid blowing up guns for fun, it's only about 25 posts down that he starts calling this quest "work". Even then, I fail to see the point to it all, but they're his fingers. I doubt that many of us are against real research into new loads, but I didn't see anything in the descriptions that qualifies as research, at least how I think of research.

johnwill is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 06:35 PM   #37
Contender
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 1998
Location: NY
Posts: 680
While I agree destructive testing has it's place, I can't see the purpose of it as it's been explained here.

I have read PO Ackley's books on destructive testing but that involved trying to determine strengths of surplus military rifle actions. This was very worthwhile because at the time many of these actions/barrels were being rebarreled/rechambered to high intensity and outright magnum cartridges. Some of questionable safety.

This is an interesting read and I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in this area.(Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders Vol 1&2)

[This message has been edited by Contender (edited September 09, 2000).]
Contender is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 09:33 PM   #38
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 2,827
Ackley did not report on the Swedish 96 Mauser, and that void is felt in some arguements.

I went through and calculated the sheer force on the locking lugs and concluded that the action could take .308 class forces. It turns out that he failure mode is not the sheering of lugs, but rather the denting of the lug's small contact area. I belive that if one were to lap the lugs until there was a greater contact area, then case harden, then headspace adjust, one could get a high perfromance '96. Nearly the same thing could be said of the '98 Turkish Mausers flooding the market right now.

One thing Ackley did do was get the Chicken Littles off the Ariska case
Clark is offline  
Old September 9, 2000, 10:31 PM   #39
Bud Helms
Staff
 
Join Date: December 31, 1999
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 12,995
Nature bats last.
Bud Helms is offline  
Old September 10, 2000, 11:13 AM   #40
johnwill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2000
Location: PA
Posts: 3,451
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sensop:
Nature bats last.[/quote]

Very good point!


johnwill is offline  
Old September 12, 2000, 01:23 AM   #41
Cheapo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 19, 1998
Posts: 986
Clark, contact me by e-mail and I'll be happy to give those non-pressure bearing parts a new home...

Your motives appear pure enough, though the method appears to be madness. You *could* convince me that your method is scientific enough if you can describe enough of a data gathering protocol...something beyond tracking the charge weights up to catastrophic failure and noting the type and character of the failure itself.

I have a few questions regarding your .45 ACP experiments which went beyond .460 Rowland levels:
Did you use increased-weight recoil springs or other failure-avoidance modifications?
Did you experience a failure (I would presume a case wall or head or primer failure would be most likely) or a chamber/barrel/slide/breechface failure?

How did the cases behave as you entered the Rowland zone?

What was the make/model of the pistol? Compensator equipped or plain jane?

And since you have no pressure equipment, how do you know you went beyond Rowland performance?

If your experiments are legit, I am quite curious and welcome posts of your experiences.

But our friends on TFL do have a very valid point about how you packaged this one. Your first post didn't even include any variation on the theme of "don't try this at home, kids!"
Cheapo is offline  
Old September 12, 2000, 10:12 AM   #42
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 2,827
MODERATOR'S NOTE:
The following entry contains some data unaccompanied by proper cautions. It is also essentially incomplete in that it gives powder charges with mention of the bullet weight for which intended.

FURTHER: NO DETAIL IS GIVEN as to differences between .45 ACP, .45 Super, and .460 Rowland.

This post is left in place strictly for general reading interest. DO NOT USE ANY OF THE INFORMATION IN THIS POST FOR HANDLOADING AT HOME.

Johnny Guest
Moderator
Handloading and Reloading
The Fring Line

end of moderator note


I could have paid $275 + shipping and handling to http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/rowland.htm#kit

but instead I read:
http://www.realguns.com/archives/020.htm http://www.realguns.com/archives/021.htm http://www.realguns.com/archives/022.htm

1) 45 acp 185 gr 1100 fps 10.2 gr AA#5 18,000 psi
2) 45 acp +P 1200 fps 10.8 gr AA#5 21,700 psi
3) 45 Super 1312 fps 12.4 gr AA#5 28,000 cup
4) 460 Rowland 1500 fps 14.5 gr AA#5 38,800 cup

I have converted a 45 to 460 Rowland loads [I kept the 45 acp case
length].
The process and principals are like the 45 Super conversion in the above
articles.

I made a 42 pound triple recoil spring assembly on a homemade guide
rod. Only about half the men tested have a strong enough grip to
chamber a round will this system [with the slide in a vice anyone can].
This spring set up only tuned my 20 ounce Patriot to about 10.3 gr AA#5
on the above chart. The benefit was that [1100 fps x185 gr] of the [1500
fps x 185 gr] momentum in the slide went into the spring energy and not
slide slam. Without heavy springs, recoil compensator[rear pointed
exhaust holes in the barrel], or very heavy slide, the recoil [when the
slide hits the stop at the rear] will damage the gun and / or my arm.
Recoil was intolerable until I got the springs. I had to double the
magazine springs to make them fast enough to keep up with the recoil
springs. This lowered the magazine capacity by one round.

The chamber support had to be at least to the web of the case [cross
section a brass case and put it in the chamber to see]. That is why I
bought a Patriot, for case support. I understand that Para Ordinance
sells some pistols with good case support [not the P10].

. The brass had to be good. I called Starline and the man said that 460
Rowland brass and 45 Super brass are the same except for length.

I calculated that the action and barrel were strong enough to withstand
the forces from increased pressure.

Warning!: I am not advocating that anyone else do what I have done.
Clark [not associated with Clarkcustomguns]



[This message has been edited by Johnny Guest (edited September 12, 2000).]
Clark is offline  
Old September 12, 2000, 03:01 PM   #43
Johnny Guest
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: August 28, 1999
Location: North Texas
Posts: 4,116
Okay, that's 101KB and this topic is hereby closed. It may be reopened as part 2, but LOADING INFORMATION WHICH EXCEEDS PUBLISHED LOADS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY APPROPRIATE CAUTIONARY NOTES.

Friends, we owe this to any inexperienced loaders who happen upon this site without sufficient experience to separate cautious experimentation from reckless adventuring.

Best to all--
Johnny Guest
H&R Admnistrator

------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---

[This message has been edited by Johnny Guest (edited September 12, 2000).]
Johnny Guest is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10148 seconds with 7 queries