Blew up new Ruger 45Colt/45ACP

[eastbank]

i have been loading the .45 colt since 1958, a first generation colt and later a ruger, i loaded a 250gr cast bullet to 800fps in the colt and the same bullet in the ruger to 1100fps. tho i kept the shells for both revolvers seperate one of the ruger loads got in with the colt loads and i fired it, no harm done but it scared the s#it out of me. i had to pound the fired case out of the colt revolver. eastbank.

[Beagle333]

I suggest a set of check weights, and a loading block to compare case volumes. I use a beam scale and I do check it between every loading block full of brass. If you use, or ever consider upgrading to a progressive, a "powder cop" die is a nice tool as well.

'Glad you weren't hurt.

[Hunter Customs]

You might want to read up on the effects of detonation.
It's claimed that detonation will quadruple the pressure.

[TimSr]

I don't understand why one round of a 250 grain bullet going 973 fps would blow the cylinder. The pressures should not be that high. Unless, this is a example of metal fatigue.

Think of it this way. If all that pressure escapes in all directions when the chamber comes apart, but there is a still enough of it directed through the barrel to move it at 973 fps, imagine how fast that bullet would be traveling if the chamber had stayed together and directed 100% of it through the barrel like its supposed to.

[Unclenick]

MarkJD,

Between you and Snuffy, you seem to have identified the problem. Snuffy put in a double charge of 21.8 grains into a case and it fit. You put a double charge of the "same weight" in and it overflowed the case. I seriously doubt the two of you are weighing the same 10.9 grains of powder.

Regarding your .45 ACP sizing die, you are operating on the assumption the brass has the same wall thickness. It may not. But this is not going to produce a pressure issue.

Originally Posted by Magnum Wheel Man

I certainly wouldn't recommend it, but would have guessed a Ruger could take as much Unique as you could fit in a case???

QuickLOAD estimates 60,000 psi if you do that. Definitely NOT a safe idea.

[Grizz12]

The Starline cases are all brand new. I had to resize the cases because the bullets almost slid down inside the case with with no effort. Even after resizing the cases I didn't like how the bullets were so loose. I could finger push them into the case.

I've had this happen with 45/70 cases but have not had the time to investigate. Why would the case be so large after resizing?? More importantly, how do we correct the problem??

[TimSr]

I've had this happen with 45/70 cases but have not had the time to investigate. Why would the case be so large after resizing?? More importantly, how do we correct the problem??

My suggestion would be to use 45LC dies to resize 45LC cases, and save the 45 ACP dies for resizing 45 ACP cases.

[F. Guffey]

"It 'must-a' been a double charge".

If I did not have time to do it correctly I would not do 'it'. I am surrounded with the most talented smiths, reloaders and builders. When something goes horribly wrong they do not make excuses.

Not funny, one of them walked up the range 'more than a few feet' to recover his barrel. As soon as he had the failure he immediately knew what went wrong. When reloading I match cases and have a spread for case weight. When finished I only have one variable, the case weight. I know the weight of the case, powder and bullet with the primer. There is nothing exciting about pulling the trigger with no clue as to what is about to happen.

F. Guffey

[Grizz12]

My suggestion would be to use 45LC dies to resize 45LC cases, and save the 45 ACP dies for resizing 45 ACP cases.

My dies are Redding 45/70

[skizzums]

Good thinking on unclenick. Way to put pieces together.

Op says a double charge is overflowing, others say a double charge fits with some room. Assuming the powders are the same, your scale is measuring light.

Guffey, I don't understand what you want us to take away from your post.

[44 AMP]

I'm nearly 100% certain I used the Unique powder I intended. I'm real careful about that since I caught my self using the wrong canister of powder once early on in my reloading. Can never be 100% certain though.

I see this as the main issue. The next one is the scale accuracy /actual setting.

Assuming your charge weight was 10.9gr if you used Bullseye /231 or other fast powder, thinking you were using Unique, this would essentially be a double charge, and very likely result in what you had happen, KABOOM!

[F. Guffey]

Guffey, I don't understand what you want us to take away from your post.

And that is OK, I place no obligation nor do I demand you even make an effort.

F. Guffey

[madmo44mag]

I have been following this tread and agree there is a scale issue.
Seems to be the only logical explanation.
I have punished more than my fair share of Rugers and for this type of damage a double charge is the cause of failure.

[F. Guffey]

Is there anything else that could have prevented this from happening?

If you learned to reloade in a dead run you did not learn that bad habit from me.

Guffey, I don't understand what you want us to take away from your post.

skizzums has no clue about what I am talking about, and that is OK. You said you were tired of turning an electronic scale on and off, when I get tired, or bored I quit, I just do not do it anymore. My electronic Pro RCBS scale developed a problem, I parked it and started on another.

You loaded three rounds, I loaded 150 30/06, I matched the case head stamps by weight. When finished I weighed all of the loaded rounds, if there was a difference it had to be with the powder. I loaded 300 257 Wheatherby Mag. and 7MM Remington Mag. rounds, no surprises.

If a reloader loads mixed cases forget verifying.

I have 5 progressive presses, I do not load on a progressive without a lock out die for straight wall cases nor do I load bottle neck cases without a powder die. I know, a reloader should not crimp and seat on the same station. 2 of my progressive presses have 4 position tool heads.

F. Guffey

[zeke]

From Nosler's website, 45 lc load information

"TECHNICAL INFORMATION:

Our load data is intended for “Strong Action” handguns. For Single Action Army and replica revolvers, please refer to “45 Colt (SAA and replicas)”.

"Note: This data should NOT be used in the Ruger New Model Vaquero (Manufactured in 2005 or newer). When loading for the New Model Vaquero, only the data listed for the Colt SAA and replicas should be used."

The old vaquero was a Blackhawk frame, and could withstand the various "ruger only" loads in older manuals The new vaquero is indeed factually a smaller frame, not built to withstand the same pressures, but to be more similar in "feel" to older colt single actions.

However that picture does not look like the smaller frame, but the older style humpback. The newer style Blackhawk "flat tops", should stand up to same pressures as humpbacks.

Using a 45 acp die on a 45 LC case is a common solution for using smaller dia jacketed bullets, or 45 acp bullets in the 45 LC case.

Unless there was a defect in that particular pistol, likely a different powder or over charge. The Nosler 250 grain bullets do suck up some case volume.

[SHR970]

zeke wrote: However that picture does not look like the smaller frame, but the older style humpback.

Unless there is a model of the contemporary Vaquero w/ adjustable rear sights and a thick top strap that I don't know about... that is not a small frame Vaquero 45.

[Jim Watson]

Doesn't matter. Even the NV - Lipsey Flattop is a heavier built gun than a Colt and the old heavy .45 Colt load was 10 gr Unique with a 255. No minor slip up demolished the OP's gun.

Elmer Keith wrecked a gun once by pushing a bullet that had jumped its crimp back into the cylinder too far for the load of No 80. The loose bullet mentioned here reminded me of that. But the OP said nothing about bullet movement in the gun.

[MarkJD]

One last pic. This one of the exploded shell. The parts I found anyway.

The difference in snuffy's and my full case powder measurement is probably due to the fact I measured first then tried to pour the double charge into the case. While snuffy filled the case with as much powder as would fit *then* weighted the powder.

My Blackhawk is a new model flat top, in the picture it just looks like an older humpback from the explosion.

Snuffy, I just noticed we're neighbors. I'm in Neenah.

[mavracer]

My Blackhawk is a new model flat top, in the picture it just looks like an older humpback from the explosion.

There's your problem the flat tops are mid size frames and won't take "ruger" only loads.
I'll also add that unique isn't the best powder for max loads in large cases it's a smidge too fast.
upper mid level loads are it's huckleberry.

[Darren007]

There's your problem the flat tops are mid size frames and won't take "ruger" only loads.

Uh oh. You better get Speer, Hornady and Nosler on the phone and tell them to retest all their "Ruger only" loads with a different gun as the Blackhawks they used to develop that data won't take them!

I'll also add that unique isn't the best powder for max loads in large cases it's a smidge too fast.

It may not be the "best" powder, but its perfectly safe to use.

[mavracer]

Uh oh. You better get Speer, Hornady and Nosler on the phone and tell them to retest all their "Ruger only" loads with a different gun as the Blackhawks they used to develop that data won't take them!

They didn't test those loads in one of the new flat top mid size frame blackhawks and yes there should be a disclaimer in the loading data, it's not hard to find information as to caution that the "ruger only" loads aren't safe in the New Vaquero and New Model Flattop 45 Colts.
here's the disclaimer from Hodgdon

NOTE: This is listed as Ruger T/C Only load data, with significantly higher pressures than SAAMI specs for .45 Colt caliber, it is meant to be used in full size Ruger Blackhawks, Super Blackhawks, Redhawks, Super Redhawks, Original Vaquero. DO NOT use this load data for any medium frame Ruger (New Vaquero, New Model flattop), Colt SAA, S&W, Colt clones!
If your Ruger SA revolver has a two digit prefix in the serial number, it is safe with these loads. If it has a 3 digit prefix in the serial number, it is a medium frame revolver and is NOT SAFE with these loads

As to Unique's suitability for hot loads I submit the OP's gun.

[Darren007]

They didn't test those loads in one of the new flat top mid size frame blackhawks and yes there should be a disclaimer in the loading data, it's not hard to find information as to caution that the "ruger only" loads aren't safe in the New Vaquero and New Model Flattop 45 Colts.
here's the disclaimer from Hodgdon

*sigh*

The 3 digit prefix Hodgdon refers to applies only to the New Model Vaquero which, starting in 2005, was produced with the medium frame. Hence the 3 digit prefix and "New Model Vaquero" moniker. No Ruger Blackhawk in existence, whether its a Blackhawk or a New Model Blackhawk, has a 3 digit prefix with the sole exception of the 50th Anniversary Model Blackhawk. The Blackhawk has always had the same frame size since its inception. And yes, they used Blackhawks in the testing of their data. Regardless, Ruger Vaqueros are irrelevant to this thread since the OP's gun was a New Model Blackhawk.

Bottom line, Hodgdon's disclaimer is wrong (and contradicts itself). The "Ruger only loads" are perfectly safe to use in a New Model Blackhawk.

As to Unique's suitability for hot loads I submit the OP's gun.

*facepalm*

[mavracer]

No Ruger Blackhawk in existence, whether its a Blackhawk or a New Model Blackhawk, has a 3 digit prefix with the sole exception of the 50th Anniversary Model Blackhawk. The Blackhawk has always had the same frame size since its inception.

You should really stop spewing dangerous information,
All the new model "flat tops" with the exception of the 44 Mag 50th anniversary gun are Mid framed
here is the link to Jeff Quinn's article on the gun in question

[wild willy]

*sigh* The new flattops are medium frame same as the new Vaquero. Not to be loaded to the same pressures as a full size Blackhawk

[Darren007]

I was unaware of the "New Model Flat Top" until now as they are only listed as as "Distributor Exclusives" on Ruger's website.

My mind didn't distinguish between "New Model Flat Top" and "New Model Blackhawk" when reading this thread and your post as well as the OP's #43 post mentioning that he had the "New Model Flat Top" as opposed to the "New Model Blackhawk".

Therefore, I humbly stand corrected that only the 50th Anniversary Blackhawks had a 3-digit prefix.