QuickLoad & Certain Powders

[mehavey]

Would appreciate others chiming in....

Re QuickLoad and predictable results (input from another Forum):

There are three known powders whose burn characteristics literally come unglued
from their moorings when underloaded from a case-fill/volume aspect:
- H110/W296
- Lil`Gun
- Blue Dot

This isn't anything that a ballistics program can model. (In fact I'd probably have to
run some kind of 3D code that tracked every powder particle -- and the free space
around it -- when blown into the case volume as dust after primer ignition.) Think
grain elevator explosion vs controlled burn column.

Very fast powders seem immune to that. Slow -- especially spheroidal/coating-
suppressed geometries are susceptible when allowed to burn as a collection of individual
particles in a large free-space oxidizing environment.

Like any model, however, QL is dependent on the user having some idea about the
limitations of it use. One improvement could be a red flashing clown (worthy of
Stephen King) that would flash across the screen when those powders went below
90% case fill.

Others chime in/add to the list of squirrelly results/powders as they've found
and I'll add to my own list.

[kerreckt]

Just started using QL in the past month. Still in the learning curve stage. I have been reloading since the late 1970's so I have that knowledge to apply to this new tool. I am very cautious and am aware of the problems with less than full cases. I will give it some thought and hopefully come back with info to add to the list. Best wishes.....

[higgite]

There are three known powders whose burn characteristics literally come unglued
from their moorings when underloaded from a case-fill/volume aspect:
- H110/W296
- Lil`Gun
- Blue Dot

Come unglued in QL? In real life? Or both?

[zxcvbob]

Originally Posted by higgite

Come unglued in QL? In real life? Or both?

Real life. (I was not aware of Lil'Gun.)

[mehavey]

Those powders tend to come unglued -- in fact -- if low loading-ratios (light) are used

[ballardw]

And apparently not just light loads.
I remember when the message for Blue Dot became "never use in 41 magnum". Ever.
http://www.alliantpowder.com/getting...y_notices.aspx

Never got a real good explanation.
After I had shot the last of my Blue Dot. (Haven't bought any since this message).
In 41 Magnum.

[Unclenick]

You won't get a good explanation for Blue Dot. I tried at their booth at the NRA Annual Meeting gun show three years ago, and they all clammed up fast and would only say, "don't do it". Apparently, their attorneys put the fear of free speech in them. About all we can do is speculate that they got customer incident reports involving the combinations they warn you not to use and got enough of them to take it seriously. Whether they even know why there is a problem, we can't say. They may not.

Regarding H110/296 coming unglued, that's backward. It becomes glued. If you call and talk to Hodgdon about it (and they used to have this posted on their load data site front page, but it disappeared in the last major revision it before the current one), they will tell you this powder needs high start pressure to function properly, and when you load it too much below about 90% (they have a couple of loads that look like about 88% or 89% listed) it can extinguish in the case, fusing unburned grains (sorta looks like a clump of yellow caviar, with the graphite burned off) and leave a bullet stuck in the barrel. Since extinguishing isn't very regular, the next shot usually fires. if the shooter hasn't noticed his recoil was wrong or, for some other reason fails to check for a stuck bullet, the next round fires into that stuck bullet, which is what raises pressure dangerously, bulging the barrel or doing worse, bursting a cylinder. Li'l Gun is probably the same, but ask Hodgdon to be sure.

[mehavey]

UncleNick... Many of us have experienced the opposite w/ H110/W296. Rather than fizzle when underloaded, it spikes unpredictably: Very high Pressures.
Significant jump in velocity, Primer pockets blown out, Severe ejector brass flow, and "Custom" case belts that weren't there before.
This all right in the middle of an otherwise uneventful shot string where every bullet hole has been accounted for.

I think you've seen this pic before:
https://castboolits.gunloads.com/sho...=1#post4983964
But at least I do think I understand it.

On the other hand, I don't understand -- and studiously avoid -- Blue Dot

[Unclenick]

CAUTION: The following post (or a page linked to) includes or discusses loading data not covered by currently published sources of tested data for this cartridge (QuickLOAD or Gordon's Reloading Tool data is not professionally tested). USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assumes any liability for any damage or injury resulting from the use of this information.

Might be good to let Hodgdon know about that if you haven't already. I am simply repeating the warning they used to have posted.

I have downloaded H110 below revolver levels in a rifle, figuring the barrel/cylinder gap was a factor in the squibbing-out, and know several others who have as well. I've treated it like a rifle powder and not gone below 70% fill, but didn't have your pressure issues. It is interesting. Especially since Hodgdon tests and lists 22-24 grains as the load range with a 180-grain jacketed bullet that probably leaves even more room in the case. Looking for differences, I see your primer is magnum where Hodgon's is not (small rifle is often about where small pistol magnum is), but the main difference is jacketed vs. cast bullets. Your bullet looks pretty long if it's a gas-checked version of the Accurate Molds 180-L (I am judging from how the drawing looks on their site), and I wonder how that compares to the Win-PP for length sticking into the case?

I must have seen that photo when you posted before but did not remember. The ring looks like incipient head separation to me, unless that's where the chamber ends and the rest is unsupported. Do you know what the seating depth is with your bullet?

Also, how did you calibrate pressure?

[mehavey]

No head separation--expanded solid brass belt where chamber support ended.

I'll look at the QL inputs again for my actual measured bullet length, but just
doing the math on Accurate's 36-180LG, OAL and case length says shank depth
is 0.281"
~~~~~~~~~~ Break Break ~~~~~~~~~~
ACTUAL:
Finished/Measured Bullet ACC 36-180LG (Lyman#2)
Length w/ GC: 0.815"
Weight: 177gr
Cartridge OAL: 2.226"
Shank/Seating Depth: 0.299
H110/23.5gr @85°
LABRADAR Velocity 2,109fps ±11

[Unclenick]

What are your barrel length and the as-fired case water overflow capacity of your cases?

[mehavey]

CAUTION: The following post includes load data generated by calculation in QuickLOAD software based on a particular powder lot, the assumption the primer is as mild as possible, and assumptions about component, chamber and gun geometry that may not correspond well to what you have. Such data should be approached by working up from published starting loads. USE THIS DATA AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL, nor QuickLOAD's author nor its distributor assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information or information derived from it.

Here's the whole set-up -- starting burn rate adjusted to actual (LABRADAR) muzzle velocity.
Marvelous MOA groups/consistent velocity (2,109fps ±11) ... until....

[P Flados]

For what it is worth, I remember the weird responses from the maker (Hercules at the time as I recall) when Blue Dot went from wonder powder to "don't even think about it". The lack of any real info made it smell like there had been out of court settlements that needed to be kept quiet.

Through the years, I have also seen much in the way of warnings and/or testimonial about bad behavior from WW296/H110. The risky starting points were low load density, low bullet weight and or low pull. The results were incomplete initial ignition followed by a spike resulting in high pressure symptoms on the brass and more than normal blast at the muzzle in combination with lower than normal muzzle velocity. At one time Winchester loading guides had warnings for 296, but this seems to have disappeared after Hodgdon took over the line. I have had a couple of experiences that may have been "mild examples" of the above described bad behavior.

Lil Gun has a number of apparent "issues" and I have just said "no thanks" to trying my luck with the stuff.

Although all of the powders in this burn rate range seem to have the ability to work great at times, many seem more "finicky" than I am happy with.

Although I still have half a 8 lb jug of H110, I really prefer using other stuff most all of the time. I now try to use Shooter World Heavy Pistol (a little faster, I bought two 8 lb jugs on sale) or Wc 680 (a little slower, milsurp version of AA 1680 that I have a few jugs of).

[Unclenick]

Mehavey,

What jumps out at me is you have Ba 45% higher than the default value, and that ought to be well outside the few percentage points of variation that normally occur in canister-grade powders. Also, your velocity with a 15" barrel is exceeding what Hornady gets with a 24" barrel with their 180-grain bullets. That, alone, is evidence of high pressure and explains why you are having to increase Ba so much to get a match. A couple of the jacketed bullets in the QL database are both longer than your bullet, so they will leave less empty space underneath them at a given COL. Based on them, I expect the Winchester bullet Hodgdon used is about 0.9" long. Plus they use a 2.110 COL. With your case capacity, that puts their minimum load at 90% case fill.

What is tough to do is get a match to the performance Hodgdon has online. This is not the first time I've heard of it happening with a straight wall case in QL, and some artificial change in case capacity or other adaptation is required. The models in QL and GRT are not perfect and do a lot of compensating by equivalence (artificially changing bullet weights and start pressure and so on). I have to knock energy content down and burn rate and weighting factor up too much to get a performance match to Hodgdon's data in QL for their 180-grain 350 Legend load. Very curious, since I have little trouble and very simple tweaks to get a good match to Hodgdon's 44 Mag data.

I would still bring this up with Hodgdon. I am not spotting the source of the problem other than what you suggest about poor case fill, but can't see why it happens here and not in the instances of lower loading I am familiar with. It also makes me wonder if QL's data is too old now. If you look at H110 and 296, you see about 10% difference in burn rate and 5% in energy content, even though they are identical powders. Hodgdon's QC should be holding them tighter than that now. I don't think Hartmut can buy these powders in Europe to update testing anymore because of their regulations on some of the chemicals in the older powder formulations.