Pointy bullets in tubular magazines

[earlmck]

Don't use pointy bullets in tubular magazines!!!

So has there been a magazine article written about lever actions in the past 100 years that failed to include that warning? Maybe so, but not many. And yet I'll bet a fair number of us lever-nuts have violated the warning at times. I know I have (110 grain hollow-points in the old thutty thutty, for one). And for sure if I had a .219 zipper I'd be feeding it 50gr. spire points. I'll bet a bunch of you fellows think the same...

Fellow name of R.W. Ballou wrote a couple of articles about the danger, or lack thereof, and while I was trying (via google) to see if he had written more stuff on subject is when I stumbled into this fine Leverguns forum. Seems Hobie was looking for pages of one of the articles about a year ago, and my google search found the thread. Essentially Mr. Balou's conclusion was that if a cartridge did go off in the magazine it might scare the peewaddin' out of you, but wouldn't likely cause you any damage and not a lot to the gun.

I have a Rossi m92 in 454 Casull. A full load of ww296 behind a 300 gr. Hornady XTP in this little 20" bbl short gun makes a right sharp wallop both out front and behind. If you can use a pointy bullet to set off the cartridge ahead of it, this Casull should be able to do it. So I took one of those 300 gr. XTP's, loaded it into a 45 colt case, drilled a hole in the tip with a 15/64 bit and epoxied in a firing pin. Loaded a second 45 colt case using Federal large pistol primer (the softest, easiest to set-off primer in my cabinet) but no powder. First I loaded/unloaded this combination of primed-case followed by firing-pin equipped case into the magazine 25 times with no incident. Then I let this pistol-primer-packing baby ride up top of the magazine with the firing-pin equipped case just behind it, and proceeded to run 30 rounds through. (1900 fps. from 30 gr. ww296). I can report that the primer is kinda' dinged up but I couldn't get it to fire. I'll try again in a few days after I have wrapped some electricians tape around the upper end of the firing-pin equipped cartridge to even the front up with the rim base and cause it to ride more level in the magazine and so get the firing pin better centered on that primer. Will report further results then.

Meanwhile, have any of my fellow levergun rule-violators ever had a cartridge go off in the magazine on them?

[pwl44m]

I haven't, NOR would I intentinally load pointed bullets in a tube magazine. I don't care Who says They do it with no mishaps- aint gonna do it. That aside I do have semi auto 22 that I got with a few other gun the other day. The mag tube is split and bulged in 2 or 3 places.Dont know how this would happen on a 22 but it did.

[Old Savage]

I had an ejecting shell set off the last round in a 12 Gauge Model 37 Ithaca. It turned the plastic plug in the magazine tube into small chips which I now have in an envelope. It destroyed the follower and magazine spring. I think if there had been more rounds in the tube it may have been much more serious. As I think in might with a tube of the loads you describe. I bit of powder burn on the hand operating the slide was all I experienced other that a start. I replace the damaged parts and the gun is fine now.

[Mac in Mo]

What's the "point" ?




Kevin

[El Chivo]

I have loaded one pointy bullet in the magazine without incident.

[Leverdude]

I'm not going to advocate it but I think its way overblown. Its hard to picture a bullet staying centered on the primer in front of it when common sense says they'll all end up canted in the tube for one thing, for another anything but FMJ is going to be too soft to dent the primer and for another the only documented cases I know of were with hard cast flat points with big metplats. The corner of the metplat was on the primer. I tried in my basement with primed UNLOADED cases to fire a primer with pointed soft points & only managed to turn them into flat points. Couldn't do it with ballistic tips either, only with a FMJ bullet could I pop a primer with a vise and hammer. I imagine thats why fireing pins arent made of lead.

[WK1]

I'm no expert on the subject, but some of this reasoning comes from the model 1878 Burgess rifle (The first lever capable of handling the 45-70 cartridge). The gun experienced documented instances of rounds going off prematurely during cycling operations due to the sensitive primers used in one particular brand of 45-70 rounds. It may have been UMC, I don't remember for sure. Anyway it was the undoing of this otherwise fine rifle, which only lasted a couple years before being replaced witht the Whitney Kennedy in 1880. I personally have one Whitney Kennedy frame that was blown off at the front of the frame, just behind the barrel. How this happened, I do not know. While the 45-70 was not a pointed projectile, explosions did occur. Probably more a symptom of senative primers, rather than bullet shape, and they may have occurred as they were released from the magazine with some force.

[Lefty Dude]

The Remington Model 14 and later 141 was designed with the tubular magazine to handle pointy bullets. All three calibers 25,30 & 35 have a curlly-que magazine tube. When the shells are in the tube the cartridges are off-set.
I understand Remington had four pages of Patent reports on this in the early 1900's.

It was a concern then or Remington would not have gone to all the trouble at that time.

I have two boxes of Factory Remington 30's and they have round nose jacketed bullets.
Just checked some 30-30 factory boxes of 20. The remington 30-30's are round nose, the Winchesters are flat points.

[BigSky56]

Not a levergun but had a Ma duce round fire before it was fully chambered must of got out of timing cause I was firing alot I got a bunch of brass splattered all over my feet I understand why those waste gunners in B17s wore armor plating over their huevos. danny

[Leverdude]

I'm no expert on the subject, but some of this reasoning comes from the model 1878 Burgess rifle (The first lever capable of handling the 45-70 cartridge). The gun experienced documented instances of rounds going off prematurely during cycling operations due to the sensitive primers used in one particular brand of 45-70 rounds. It may have been UMC, I don't remember for sure. Anyway it was the undoing of this otherwise fine rifle, which only lasted a couple years before being replaced witht the Whitney Kennedy in 1880. I personally have one Whitney Kennedy frame that was blown off at the front of the frame, just behind the barrel. How this happened, I do not know. While the 45-70 was not a pointed projectile, explosions did occur. Probably more a symptom of senative primers, rather than bullet shape, and they may have occurred as they were released from the magazine with some force.

Marlin1881s experienced the same thing while the US Army was trying them out for size. I tend to agree about the primers of the time being to blame.

[Old Savage]

Leverdude - very interesting, that is the only info I have read like that. The Remington 12 gauge round in the Model 37 was struck center on by the rim of the ejecting case and shows the indent. I was sharply working the slide at waist lever as a dove came toward me. This apparently jerked the gun back into the rim of the bottom ejecting shell.

[Retro]

I've posted this here before, and probably will again

http://www.retro.co.za/gundex/articles/ ... 0Safe.html

(Short version: Mr Balou agrees with OP)

[AJMD429]

I respect the attitude of wanting to think outside the box and not just accept whateveryone assumes it 'fact', and I think the experimental method sounds really safe and well-thought-out.

I don't have any cartridges in leverguns I'm aching to use pointy bullets in, and so doubt I'll ever do so, but I think it's an interesting topic to investigate.

Another part of the issue is the question as to whether if one round did detonate, being in a magazine tube, vs. chamber, what would THAT round do to the one in front of it - shove it forward, or detonate it as well, for a chain-reaction?

[86er]

I have loaded and shot pointy bullets in my 30-30. Well, originally I intended to load one in chamber and one in mag. Once in the field though, caution went to heck and I loaded a second in the magazine. No ill results, I did this often. Once, I needed the third shot, so after that I subsequently loaded three in the mag. This went on until I had finally shot all 50 loaded cartridges, a little more than half at paper. I figured the points lay down in the mag tube and could only "stand up" and hit the primer in front upon dropping the rifle or otherwise giving a good wrap, or during recoil. Now I don't see the need for the pointy bullets and won't repeat the act, but I wouldn't be scared to do it if I ran out of bullets or something and loaded up like that for a setting.

[Stan in SC]

I knew a gunsmith in North Georgia who was trying to unjam a customer's lever action rifle.One round detonated in the tube and set off another.The gent got a belly full of shrapnel as he was standing right beside the rifle while working on it.Bout killed him.
I have loaded accelerators in a 30-30 with no problem but would never do it again..I just would not want to be the one person in a million who tempted chance and lost.

Stan in SC

[earlmck]

Much appreciating the input. Obviously poop can happen at times with no regard to the shape of your bullet!

And I have been going along thinking old Arthur Savage made up the "no pointy bullets in the tube" mantra about 1895 as another point in favor of his new design, and it was just repeated mindlessly by the next 5 generations of gun writers. But sounds like maybe it was a real issue with some of the early primer compounds.

And for AJM, the Ballou article in Rifle 228 explored your issue more fully than in his previous Gun Digest article. His premise was that cartridges could go off in the magazine, and so what would happen... would you get a chain-fire event. He finally got one with heavy pointy-cast bullets in 45-70 loaded with fast (Unique) powder...

And I haven't pursued my next pointy-bullet test yet, using the leveled-out firing pin cartridge. After the first three firings yesterday I looked at the test cartridge and it just had marks around the edge of the primer. I didn't look again until after the 30 rounds, and by then it did have marks all over the primer, including the center. Had to go back to my day job for a while today, but tomorrow I'll get a chance to fire off a bunch more of those shoulder-whappers so I can make final report.

[Old Ironsights]

I guess I'm missing somthing...

Is the mass of the "primer only" cartridge equal to a loaded cartridge?

If it's not, that's a problem. The Mas of the two cartridges (pointy + primer) must be equivelent within OEM specs or the test is invalid (even if the difference is only X grains).

An ultra light (no bullet &/or no powder) Primer - Only cartridge cannot be reasonably be expected to impact the firing-pin pointy bullet with the same relative force as a "real" cartridge. Simple Physics.

Otherwise, interesting test.

[El Chivo]

86er,

it may be that the mass of only one or two rounds was insufficient to set off the primer, but if you had had 6 or 7 loaded there would have been a lot more inertia/weight/force and a different outcome.

[rogn]

Some years back one of the gunrags did a workup on this topic, and they found it was difficult to set of a round in the tube.Inertia was important as ws the placement of the bullets nose.IIRC when a slow propellant and lite crimp went off it was a non event. When the tube chined off it was usually swollen and split. They even went to the extent of making a "test tube" and drpping it fom a ladder to ensure ignition. Cant remember the magazine but it might have been "Rifle" or even an off day at "Precision Shooting". Does anyone else remember seeing it?

[J Miller]

Some years back one of the gunrags did a workup on this topic, and they found it was difficult to set of a round in the tube.Inertia was important as ws the placement of the bullets nose.IIRC when a slow propellant and lite crimp went off it was a non event. When the tube chined off it was usually swollen and split. They even went to the extent of making a "test tube" and drpping it fom a ladder to ensure ignition. Cant remember the magazine but it might have been "Rifle" or even an off day at "Precision Shooting". Does anyone else remember seeing it?

I do remember reading that article, but alas CRS has set in and I can't remember where.

Joe

[Ray Newman]

Here's the way I look at this: seems that it is -- as one article/poster pointed out -- "difficult" for the so-called pointed bullet to set off another while in the magazine tube. But, sh*t happens and it usually when you least expect it and at the most inopportune times.

Myself, I rather err on the side of what makes me feel comfortable. If I ever try it, I‘ll load the rounds singly into the chamber.

[Leverdude]

Much appreciating the input. Obviously poop can happen at times with no regard to the shape of your bullet!

And I have been going along thinking old Arthur Savage made up the "no pointy bullets in the tube" mantra about 1895 as another point in favor of his new design, and it was just repeated mindlessly by the next 5 generations of gun writers. But sounds like maybe it was a real issue with some of the early primer compounds.

Its important to remember that those early tube discharges were with non pointy soft lead bullets, I believe they were mostly round nosed at that time. I agree whole heartedly that it was a primer problem more than anything else.

I think people should do what they think is right & safe. But I cant help but wonder why, if a person feared tube discharges, they would use a tube fed gun at all, since the makers caution against pointed bullets, and theres documented cases of FP lead bullets causing them. If you cant use pointed bullets & you cant use flat ones you are limited to RN's & those are the ones that went bang way back when. So what should a person use?

[Kansas Ed]

I have also come to the conclusion over the years that it was probably untested myth...but I see no need for pointy bullets in my Levers, so never had the need to test. IF I were to test though, I would use Federal Primers as those are known to be the most sensitive on the market today. I also agree that you need to have a series of dummy cartridges in the magazine and they should be the same equivalent mass as they would normally be. If you load a series of the dummy cartridges in the mag, this would cover the positioning variable pretty well. One other thing that may or may not have an effect would be the strength of the mag spring...IMO a weak spring would allow the cartridges to unstack under recoil and the spring would slam them back into position at the end of the recoil cycle.

Ed

[kaschi]

I've often wondered why Remington makes 150gr PSP bullets for the 35 Remington. It seems that there are a lot of 35 Remingtons in Marlin 336's out there and I'll bet their users have(maybe unknowingly) used these loads in their rifles. I'm sure if this was even a problem, Remington would only be offering 200 CLSP.

As to the Remington 14 and 141: I've often wondered how that spiral tube keeps the point of one bullet from touching the primer of the cartridge in front of it. If the 14 and 141 tubes were really designed to do this, then why did Remington not offer the 25, 30 and 32 Remington in their ammo line with pointed bullets? It seems they offered only the 35 with the 150 PSP.

Lastly, it makes a guy think that if the spiral tube was such a grand idea, then Winchester and Marlin should have added the idea to their lever guns. If nothing else, spiral tubes look kinda neat and I do love the Rem Model 14's.

[earlmck]

A number of good points being made. I didn't give much detail on my test procedure, I see. Here's a bit more: Yes, the firing-pin cartridge is a bit lighter than a my other rounds, but only by about 5 grains. I drilled out enough hole to slide about 1/4" of steel down for epoxying. The cartridge itself is a 45 colt, which is shorter than the 454 Casull, but allowed my overall length to be not much greater. It has a 65 grain butt end of 30/30 case in place of 30 grains of powder and the drilled-out lead, but a dead primer, whereas the Casull full load is 30 grains powder. But the bullet started out at 300 grains, so pretty good mass going in... The cartridge I am trying to get to fire in the magazine is also 45 colt since this allows me to use large pistol primers which are easier to ignite than the small primers normally used in the Casull (yep, a Federal large pistol, which is indeed the easiest to ignite). No powder in the test case, but again I sliced the bottom half-inch off a 30/30 case, ground off the rim, drilled out the firing pin hole, and dropped it in. It weighs 62 grains, so more than makes up for the lack of 30 grains of powder.

For firing, I put the test cartridge up top followed by the firing pin cartridge, and then 7 more regular full-loaded Casulls behind. Then I fired off the 7, loaded 7 more thru the gate and fired those until I had fired 28 rounds. Intended to return today with the firing-pin cartridge modified with tape wrapped around the mouth area to level the case out, but didn't make it out. So that test, which I think will put more hits close to center of the primer, is yet to come.

Here's a pic of the firing-pin cartridge. Nasty looking, what? I cut the bottom off a 7/32 chainsaw file, ground the handle end to firing pin profile, using the pin out of my model 70 as my model to copy. Then had that 1/4" or so of file to epoxy into the hole drilled into the nose of the 300 gr. XTP.


Firing-pin equipped cartridge

[Old Savage]

I suggest you stop the experiment and just show some pics of the cartridges so far.

[El Chivo]

I've often wondered why Remington makes 150gr PSP bullets for the 35 Remington. It seems that there are a lot of 35 Remingtons in Marlin 336's out there and I'll bet their users have(maybe unknowingly) used these loads in their rifles. I'm sure if this was even a problem, Remington would only be offering 200 CLSP.

might be for the Contender following, I heard that the 35 Rem has become a favorite cartridge for Contenders.

[earlmck]

OK, got my shooting done today. Here's pics:


Test Cartridge, No powder, Federal L.P. primer, 300 gr. Hornady XTP


"FiringPin" cartridge, with tape used to level it up with the primer of the test crtrg.


After 10 rounds of 454 Casull, 31gr. 'Lil Gun, 300 gr. Hornady, 2010 fps


After 30 rounds


After 50 rounds

My thoughts. 1) The leveling tape worked great: all hits pretty much in the middle of the primer (without the tape I got most hits at the edge of the primer).
2) 31 grains of 'Lil Gun is a bit hot in my rifle with these CBC cases. I'll back off to 29 gr. top henceforth should I ever again desire a full-power load.
3) If I can't set off a Fed. L.P. using that firing pin case in this light rifle with these loads, it can't be done with any softpoint spitzer, no way, no how. IMHO the old warning about no pointy bullets in a tubular magazine is just another of those old wives tales.

My son-in-law looked at the dented primer in my test cartridge and asked a good question: "how do you know it didn't go off?"
Answer is that when a primer goes off with a 300 grain bullet up front and no support other than a firing pin behind (as opposed to being supported by the rifle breech) the bullet stays in place and the primer blows out the back, usually becoming a silver donut wrapped around the firing pin. I know this because I have quite a pile of silver donuts (and a few gold ones from Remington primers) from some testing I did before I ever put the firing-pin cartridge into the magazine of my new Rossi.

[lozen]

I've never felt the need for pointed bullets in a 30-30, but have always figured it would be about impossible to set off a cartridge in the tube with a bullet with a soft lead point.

[Chas.]

My son-in-law looked at the dented primer in my test cartridge and asked a good question: "how do you know it didn't go off?"

Another question - how do you know it would have gone off normally? There are such things as bad primers, however, it would certainly be extremely coincidental to have a bad one in this test.

[J Miller]

<snip>

Its important to remember that those early tube discharges were with non pointy soft lead bullets, I believe they were mostly round nosed at that time. I agree whole heartedly that it was a primer problem more than anything else.

I think people should do what they think is right & safe. But I cant help but wonder why, if a person feared tube discharges, they would use a tube fed gun at all, since the makers caution against pointed bullets, and theres documented cases of FP lead bullets causing them. If you cant use pointed bullets & you cant use flat ones you are limited to RN's & those are the ones that went bang way back when. So what should a person use?

One thing that people either do not think about, or just don't know about, is that the early primers were domed or rounded rather than flat like the ones we have now.
A rounded primer vs a flat or round nose bullet is no different than a pointy bullet vs a flat primer. It is possible to make them go bang under the right conditions.

Personally, I see absolutely no need to use pointed bullets in my lever guns. No Hornady LEVERevolution, no spitzers or spire points or any others with points.
I don't believe they are needed for the type of cartridges lever guns use, nor do I believe it's prudent to tempt fate by using them.

Joe

[J Miller]

earlmck,

Your battered primers just serve to prove one point I've made for years. It takes a sharp impact to detonate a primer.

Now, in your experiment you had a lot of weight for the inertia to move, and the firing pin and test primer cartridges moved with the mass with the magazine spring cushioning it as well. However, in certain circumstances, such as if your test primer cartridge got stuck and could not move, I'll bet it could have fired.
Or if there was a gap between the FP cartridge and the test primer cartridge it also could have fired.

In your test with the FP ctge resting against the test primer there was no impact, just gradual battering, so the primer didn't fire.

But .... change the circumstances and perhaps you'd get a different result. Perhaps put a measured plug in the magzine tube so the test primer cartridge couldn't move with the mass and see what happens. Lots of different things to try.

I don't think making this blanket statement is appropriate just yet:
"3) If I can't set off a Fed. L.P. using that firing pin case in this light rifle with these loads, it can't be done with any softpoint spitzer, no way, no how. IMHO the old warning about no pointy bullets in a tubular magazine is just another of those old wives tales. "

Joe

[Leverdude]

<snip>

Its important to remember that those early tube discharges were with non pointy soft lead bullets, I believe they were mostly round nosed at that time. I agree whole heartedly that it was a primer problem more than anything else.

I think people should do what they think is right & safe. But I cant help but wonder why, if a person feared tube discharges, they would use a tube fed gun at all, since the makers caution against pointed bullets, and theres documented cases of FP lead bullets causing them. If you cant use pointed bullets & you cant use flat ones you are limited to RN's & those are the ones that went bang way back when. So what should a person use?

One thing that people either do not think about, or just don't know about, is that the early primers were domed or rounded rather than flat like the ones we have now.
A rounded primer vs a flat or round nose bullet is no different than a pointy bullet vs a flat primer. It is possible to make them go bang under the right conditions.

Personally, I see absolutely no need to use pointed bullets in my lever guns. No Hornady LEVERevolution, no spitzers or spire points or any others with points.
I don't believe they are needed for the type of cartridges lever guns use, nor do I believe it's prudent to tempt fate by using them.

Joe

Sure its different, the theory being the FP wont hit the primer because its below flush with the case head. Even the old domed primers were below flush. I guess a round nosed bullet could still reach it & thats what was commonly used then.

I dont use pointy bullets either Joe, but its not because I'm scared to. Its mostly because the bullets I buy have the canalure in the right place & just happen to be flat pointed. I cant see any reason to look for better ballistics when I'm limited to 2600 or less fps so why bother. But I dont buy the idea that its dangerous, if anything the big heavy flat points commonly used are more dangerous.
I supose if I lived someplace where a long shot much over 100 yards were likely I might experiment with spitzers in my 308MX but I'd probably still load only one in the chamber & one in the tube to keep from deforming the points & defeating the purpose of them in the first place.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

Some of you may recall that there was a tube discharge in a levergun a couple of years back with pictures posted. I believe it was a Marlin in a pistol caliber. One of the issues that was suspected was that the guy had used large rifle primers in lieu of large pistol and thus the primers protruded above the case head. I think he was using a semi-roundnose type of bullet though I can't recall for sure. Maybe someone still has the link somewhere.

[J Miller]

Leverdude,

Just curious, have you ever loaded and used round topped primers?
I have loaded many hundreds of them. I actually have a set of punches for my RCBS press mounted priming arm to use with them.
Anyway, although flat point bullets are supposed to not reach a below flush primer, and rounded nose bullets might, something happened way back when to set off that 45-70 in the tube magazine.
All I said, or at least tried to, was that the rounded primer 'could' have been a contributing factor.

I've experimented with spitzers in my Winchester 94 30-30s. One round at a time though. What I found is that out to 200 or so yards the spitzers gained me nothing. So I continued using the Speer flat points that have the highest BC for the then available 30-30 bullets and have no regrets or worries.

"IF" I owned a bolt action chambered for the 30-30 you bet I'd work on using the spitzers. But unless you push the cartridge to the max I still doubt you'd gain much benefit from them. That's just my opinion cos I've never owned a bolt gun in 30-30. Subject to change should I ever get a bolt action 30-30.

Joe

[earlmck]

The reason this kid got stirred up about the "Pointy-bullet-in-tube-mag" thing is a little wildcatting project I got started on. My personal prejudice is that I think the m92 was the finest little gun ever made, and Rossi is doing a nice job of turning out new ones (with a little smoothing ala Nate). And they chamber the thing for the .454 Casull which is a max-pressure cartridge with a serious bolt thrust, so they are pretty proud of the steel they are putting in this real fine old design.

I have long wanted a m92 in .218 bee (to accompany a couple 25-20's and a 38-40) but had never been able to part with the amount of money wanted for a nice one. So got to thinking... how about getting a Rossi in .357, rebarrelling to the .256 win necked to .22. Now wouldn't that be kinda' cool? 'Course it's a custom chamber reamer, etc. so we're talking some $. Then I got the bright idea of starting with the .454 Casull and necking it to .22, or maybe 6mm. Got in the books and saw how close my Casull idea would be to the 6mm Benchrest, just being a bit shorter and with a rim. Then got the idea, of "I wonder if you could just use the B.R. cartridge from the getgo, does the m92 really need the rim? Answer: my Rossi in 454 Casull feeds and extracts a 6mm B.R. just fine. Problem: the overall length is too much, and gonna have to use a shortened B.R.

Now, the first gunsmith I hit with this wild idea about tossed my posterior out his door 'cause he just knew I was going to use pointy bullets in the thing. And dang right I am! If I can find a 'smith who'll do the bbl/chamber work for me.

And aside from that, did you notice Nath's "Shoulda been a Lever" thread a little bit ago?

These 110grn V-max do cut them up some but make for a reasonably safe shot. Flat shooting too, this load shoots flatter than my last 243 100grn load use to, to 300 yds!

Nath

Wouldn't it be tempting to use that V-max in the 30/30? I know I haven't proved my pointy bullet thing to everyone, but I have proved it to myself adequately. I am for sure going to give those V-max's a try out of my Marlin. And that will be looong before I get the Rossi wildcat project done...

[JP_TX]

[quote="kaschi"]I've often wondered why Remington makes 150gr PSP bullets for the 35 Remington. It seems that there are a lot of 35 Remingtons in Marlin 336's out there and I'll bet their users have(maybe unknowingly) used these loads in their rifles. I'm sure if this was even a problem, Remington would only be offering 200 CLSP.

I was thinkin on that same point. To make the odds of 336/35Rem users loading the 150grn 35Rem ammo even better, if you look at the usual green box from Rem. you will not find on any side a "WARNING: Do not use this ammunition in tube magazine rifles." message. Nope, it ain't there.

I like my 35Rems and I have used the 150grn factory ammo. But I only use it as a "Two Shot" with one in the chamber and one in the magazine. Adding one round at a time as I use the chambered round. See I am the guy that believes even if it is only a chance in a million something goes wrong, odds are it's going to be me that wins that prize.

[Old Savage]

I find this amazing and I wonder if earl may be a little crazy.

[Don McDowell]

A couple of very easy and affordable pointy bullet usage in leverguns solutions, BLR and Savage 99

[earlmck]

Well dang, Savage, all us levernuts are a little crazy, aren't we? And JP, I've got a feeling that the reason there isn't any warning on the 35Rem factory ammo is because at least some of the folks over there in the ammo dept. at Remington realize it is a total non-problem. The problem would come if you were a manufacturer who wanted to chamber for a load that really wants a pointy bullet, when we have an American public "educated" by 5 generations of gun writers telling us not to use a pointy bullet in a tubular magazine. And yes, Don, I like the Savage 99, have 4 of 'em, and one is my main big-game rifle. But I still really love that little m92!

I have a little primer-sensitivety testing rig I've Rube-Goldberged. Uses a fish de-liar pulling on a pair of springs to power a pointed cartridge nose into a primed case. So I tested the cartridge dented by the 50 rounds of shooting which I pictured above. Normal Federal pistol primer goes off occasionally at 14#pull, always by 16#. The test cartridge went off at 12#, so as you would expect from looking at the dent, it had become more ready to fire. Here it is, you can see the anvil is still in the primer pocket, while the primer body became a donut somewhat welded around the firing pin. For reference here, the little dents produced by firing in the rifle I can pretty closely duplicate by a 2# pull in my test rig. Remington Large Rifle primers take 24# to touch off, the most of any primer I tested. And a Hornady 22 cal. 53grain hollow point epoxied into the tip of the XTP bullet was just as effective, but not more so, at setting off a primer as my "firing-pin" cartridge. But it's a one-shot test deal: setting off the primer begins to open up hollow point.



Test cartridge after firing in the "primer-test" rig

And here is another that didn't fire. This was a Hornady 55gr. spire point epoxied into the tip of the 300 grain XTP, and the primer it whacked at a pull of 26#. I think it has been converted into a round-nose. So is it now safe to use in my lever gun?
I don't know what it would take to produce a similar force within the magazine of the rifle. Maybe dropping butt down off a 12 story building?



55 grain Hornady spire point which failed to fire Federal L.P. primer

So let's keep on shootin' those levers, whether we use pointy bullets or not

crazy Earl

[Leverdude]

Leverdude,

Just curious, have you ever loaded and used round topped primers?

(Coulda swore I responded to this the other day? )

Nope, But I'v got a bunch of old ammo with them and dont think theyre any more liable to get hit than the modern flat ones.

I have loaded many hundreds of them. I actually have a set of punches for my RCBS press mounted priming arm to use with them.
Anyway, although flat point bullets are supposed to not reach a below flush primer, and rounded nose bullets might, something happened way back when to set off that 45-70 in the tube magazine.
All I said, or at least tried to, was that the rounded primer 'could' have been a contributing factor.

Might be, I'm leaning more towards priming compound or perhaps cup thickness than the shape of it.

I've experimented with spitzers in my Winchester 94 30-30s. One round at a time though. What I found is that out to 200 or so yards the spitzers gained me nothing. So I continued using the Speer flat points that have the highest BC for the then available 30-30 bullets and have no regrets or worries.

I'v really no interest in useing pointed bullets in my gun. I dont see any reasons. But I dont buy the phobia involved with pointed soft points either. I just dont think I'd see any real benefit.

"IF" I owned a bolt action chambered for the 30-30 you bet I'd work on using the spitzers. But unless you push the cartridge to the max I still doubt you'd gain much benefit from them. That's just my opinion cos I've never owned a bolt gun in 30-30. Subject to change should I ever get a bolt action 30-30.

Joe

Maybe in a light bullet it would make sense, but in a 150 or above I dont think we could reach a velocity fast enough for it to matter much at all.

[J Miller]

Well darn Leverdude, looks like we agree on things for the most part.
Dontcha just hate it when that happens

Joe

[Griff]

While I remain unconvinced, I still don't think pointed projectiles are safe in tubular magazines. I do have to agree some evidence suggests that it is not the danger some are prone to repeat.

However, the reason I remain unconvinced isn't based on evidence espoused above or what I can easily demonstrate on my living room coffee table... but rather on what I DON'T know. Foremost is the unknown affect that recoil has on the cartridges in the magazine. JMiller's comment about the difference between a dummy cartridge and a fully loaded cartridge and how under recoil that could make the difference between a discharge in the magazine and a non-discharge.


Three rows of three cartridges lying flat on the coffe table. 1 row of 150 Sierras, 1 row of 150 Speers, and lastly, 3 Remington 150s.


Same 3 rows from a slightly rearward view. And while it's easy to see that laying on a flat surface the bullet noses on each are at rest on the inner portion of the leading cartridge's rim, they are still somewhat in contact with the edge of the primer.

My questions revolve around whether the positioning of the cartridge noses move or otherwise change attitude during recoil. Additionally, how does magazine spring pressure affect the action of cartridges in the mag tube?

Frankly, given the proximity of the bullet nose in the magazine, I'll still refrain from using pointy bullets in tubular magazines. Personally, I think it's foolhardy to tempt the odds. But, hey, if you wanna blow off your forend, possibly your forearm... I don't think I'll accompany you to the range!

[Ben_Rumson]

This maybe a good indicator ...Pull the butt plate on your rifle... drill a hole in the butt of said rifle to securely accept the soft point spitzer bullet/bullets you want to use, make sure the point is well exposed in said rifle, with chambered round & magazine full... Then place the point of said spitzer against a primed case secured in a through drilled hole in a wooden block... Discharge the weapon... If the primer doesn’t go off... I’d say you’re good to go... please keep us posted ... thanks...

[J Miller]

How about this for a test?

Acquire a transparent plastic tube the same OD/ID as a magazine tube.
Install it on a lever gun without the forearm. Put the follower and spring in it so the pressure is there.
Then we could actually see what the cartridges do in the magazine while under spring pressure.

My wife has an account with a plastics company. As soon as I can get the dimensions of the tube walls I'll do some research.

Joe

[Bogie35]

Spire-point bullets are overrated anyway. Sure, they improve trajectory and downrange velocity. But, mechanically speaking, round or flat-nosed bullets offer more reliable terminal performance, especially at the lower velocities found farther downrange. So, why risk losing a hand for the sake of gaining a few extra yards? The tubular mag lever gun doesn't really need to be improved...it has proven itself adequate for shooting as far out as most of us can accurately shoot anyway.

HOWEVER, if you want top performance from a lever gun, check out the 338 Marlin Express. It will do pretty much anything a bolt-action 30-06 will do, but with a cooler attitude.

bogie

[gimdandy]

THANKS EARL
Been shootin a 219 zipper for a while now and have loaded and shot it a LOT w/ tube full of pointed bullets of all kinds and all velocities W/O EVEN A DENT .Some marks yes
Very good tests and very well thought out .
This isn't much different than lots of other things in time "really guys , the world is round " " it's called smokeless powder and it is much better really "

[J Miller]

<snip> "really guys , the world is round " " it's called smokeless powder and it is much better really " <snip>

NOOOOOO! You've got to be kidding! That can't be right. What about all the dragons and sea monsters that lurk at the edge to eat all the ships that venture there???

Smokeless powder's just a passing fad. Just ask any BPCR shooter.

Joe

[earlmck]

[quote="gimdandy"]THANKS EARL
Been shootin a 219 zipper for a while now and have loaded and shot it a LOT w/ tube full of pointed bullets of all kinds and all velocities W/O EVEN A DENT .Some marks yes

Sure glad to hear from you, gimdandy. I knew you zipper fellows had to be "cheating" and using pointy bullets nowdays...

And I see some real thinking going on with some of you other levernuts. I'm very interested in what you find if you carry out some further exploration. For sure, for your own reassurance, you want to look up R.W. Ballou's article "Bullets, Primers and Tubular Magazine Safety -- Busting the Myth" in the 11/06 issue of Rifle Magazine (#228). And on the first page of this present thread, fellow levernut RETRO posts a link to Ballou's first article in the '02 Gun Digest. But the Rifle article carries the tests much farther...
Griff, you are wondering if the bullet would occasionally hit the middle of the primer even if it usually hits the edge. My first test, before I built up the front of the cartridge to make it center better, did have several hits out of the 28 shots pretty much in the center of the primer, even though by far the majority were around the edge. So when the thing goes "boom" anything becomes possible, I'd say... And Joe, what rifle you figuring for your clear plastic tube? Or did you think we should try it on my .454? Too bad we don't seem to be very near each other.

I totally agree with the folks who noted that there is no reason to go "pointy" with our 30/30's and hunting loads. Fine bullet performance and no great ballistic penalty at these pedestrian velocities. But you gotta admit there are possibilities out there where velocities are up there and non-pointy bullet choice is very confining (.219 zipper comes to mind first, but how about the .218 Bee with some of the new powders, such as 'Lil Gun? And Marlin's mx series, especially when they get smart and give us 7mm, 6mm, and maybe 22. wow!)

[J Miller]

Earl,

I was thinking about setting it up on my Win 94 carbine. Can't get too much more tubular than that. I also think my Marlin 1894 Cowboy uses the same size tube, so I might could do one for that too.
Yeah, it would be a lot more fun to tinker on these projects if we were closer.

Wife says I have to so a "home" search for the catalog. Hah, that's a job I'm not looking forward to.

Joe