OT, maybe - Powder detonations in large handgun cases, JMHO

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:43 pm

That detonation thing just won't die. It might be relevant when using small charges of slow burning rifle powders in large rifle cases, but it has no bearing on handgun rounds. NOT EVEN THE .45 COLT.

Consider this, Bullseye is one of the fastest burning pistol powders. I have load data for this powder in the .45 Colt that predates the solid head cases.
Bullseye fills very little of the case. The only times ammo loaded with Bullseye has KaBOOMed a gun is when it was double or more charged.

In the very early days of smokeless powder there was semi-smokeless, bulk smokeless and regular smokeless. The ammo makers used them all in their .45 Colt factory loads. Now consider this, the .45 Colt was physically the largest handgun cartridge we had until the .454 Casull was introduced. And in the end all of the ammo manufacturers choose to use the small charges of fast burning powders.

How many of you have ever pulled down factory handgun ammo to see what's in it? Go do it sometimes, you'll be surprised at what you find. Every single .45 Colt cartridge I've pulled down has had a minuscule amounts of fine powder in it. If this was dangerous, if this produced detonations, they would not do it. They would use bulkier powders. But they don't. Because there isn't any such problem.

So why then have we not heard of this detonation phenomenon sooner? Because it doesn't exist outside the imagination of the gun writers, progressive press users and gamers who want an excuse when they blow up their race guns.

None of the accredited ballistic labs have duplicated such a thing as a detonation. (If they have I have yet to hear of it.)

Small charges of fast burning powder is not the problem. Double charges are. I've used Bullseye, 231, 700X, and probably several other fast burning powders in my .45 Colt loads. I've never had such a problem ... ever.
I've even loaded cowboy game loads with fast burning powders such as 231 and Unique and nope, no detonations. None.
You know what will happen if you load to light of charge of pistol powder, you'll get a bullet stuck in the barrel.

To put it mildly, I don't believe detonations in handgun calibers exist. I believe that every handgun blown up by what the owners claimed to be detonations were actually double or triple charges of powder or two bullets seated in the cases in progressive presses.

In other words, I believe that the term "detonation" was borrowed by negligent reloaders who wanted an excuse so they wouldn't have to own up for their mistakes.

But I'm willing to listen. Any body got any evidence to prove me wrong?

Joe

Thunder50 · Post by **Thunder50** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:02 pm

Don't know about evidence, but I had bought a S&W M29 sihlouette gun and proceeded to take the top strap at a 90degree angle or so. I had won a pound of AA#9 powder at a sihlouette match and wanted to try it in the new gun. Loaded 13 new cases with individually weighted powder charges, visually inspected cases/powder levels in the loading block and seated the bullets.

Shot 6 rounds at a paper target to check accuracy (not real good) and proceeded to use the last 7 prairie dog hunting. Loaded 3 and shot #1, missed the PD, opened cylinder, checked bore, closed cylinder, shot again, just missed PD(I can see bullet impact), opened cylinder again, noticed I had touched off #3, so turned cylinder so last round would come up when I cocked the hammer. Pulled trigger on last shot, heard a "pop" and saw a pinkish flash in front of me, hardly any recoil ,and wondered why I couldn' see downrange. Then I noticed the top strap standing up and top 45% of cylinder was gone.

Friend asked what that noise was that went over his head (about 50 ft away) I said it was probably top half of the cylinder. Rear sight elevation nut was in the front of my shirt, cases were in the cylinder, #1 and #3 were dented and last shot fired was split.

Took last 4 rounds home and disassembled to recheck things and everything was OK.

Everyone might discount detonation, but this old boy won't. Keep the gun as a reminder.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:13 pm

It's always a "detonation" when someone blows up a gun, regardless of the real cause.

No one likes to think they may have seated 2 bullets into one cartridge thereby causing horrendous pressures.

Or any other mistake.

So we have "detonation". It's a good explanation, even though it hasn't been proven in a lab. Even though folks have been trying for 50 years.

.44-40 with 2 bullets ...

after 3 blown sixguns .. all by the same guy .. he finally figured out it wasn't detonation ... it was bullets sticking in the loading die and getting 2 in a case ....

SHIQ HAPPENS ...

gon2shoot · Post by **gon2shoot** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:57 pm

My mind may be slipping but IIRC there was someone who made a 3? bullet round of stacked Short wad-cutters? Seems it was late 70s.
I always wondered what would happen if they seperated.

rimrock · Post by **rimrock** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:12 pm

I respect your opinion with your gun, but my opinion with my gun has strongly influenced my actions/reactions. I've been reloading since Feb 06, so I'm still green. One the earlier charges I used was 2-3 grains of Unique under a .456 round ball in my .45 LC, IIRC. It took monumental strength to extract the empty brass, and the barrel on my Ruger Vaquero was warmer than usual. No blow up, but I didn't shoot any more that load--just didn't fit with what I'd experienced before or after. So, I believe too low a charge can lead to detonation. I have felt and observed the flame from the detonation of black powder going off in a Walker Colt clone in the normal course of shooting such guns, so my hearing tells me theres a big difference in the physics applied to smokeless compared to BP. However you explain it, lower volume loads can lead to trouble.

Kansas Ed · Post by **Kansas Ed** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:01 pm

March of 1989: 44 Mag.

15.0 gr. of Blue Dot behind a 180gr Hornady bullet. This was about 2.4 grains below the recommended starting load. Showed a series of random pierced primers. Heavier loads showed fine.

I will chalk it up to detonation until proven different. And I have never used anything other than a single stage press.

The reason detonation is so difficult to reproduce, is that atmospheric conditions probably play a major role in the circumstance. That and the powder position is likely a major culprit.

Ackley tried for years to reproduce the situation, and even though he didn't ever succeed, firmly believed in the phenomenon.

BTW, the Bullseye, Unique argument is counter to what is commonly surmised. Slow powders seem to be the only ones which experience detonation, and only loaded to low volumes in regards to case capacities.

Ed

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:28 pm

Kansas Ed
Levergunner

Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 22

Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:01 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March of 1989: 44 Mag.

15.0 gr. of Blue Dot behind a 180gr Hornady bullet. This was about 2.4 grains below the recommended starting load. Showed a series of random pierced primers. Heavier loads showed fine.

I am no expert nor will I ever claim to be one but. If you play with what the companys recommend you are asking for posible problems.

rimrock Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:12 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I respect your opinion with your gun, but my opinion with my gun has strongly influenced my actions/reactions. I've been reloading since Feb 06, so I'm still green. One the earlier charges I used was 2-3 grains of Unique under a .456 round ball in my .45 LC, IIRC. It took monumental strength to extract the empty brass

The only loading Lyman lists( at least in my books) for a .454RB in .45colt is 6.5grns of Unique at a claimed 521fps from a 71/2 Ruger Blackhawk.

If you are following the data put out by the experts JMiller is correct. When you muck around by not useing tested data you take your chances.

The Lewis · Post by **The Lewis** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:04 pm

Seems like sage advise, always follow the recipe exactly as they tested it.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:33 pm

The advice to stick the loading manuals is excellent.

As to "detonations" in revolvers with loads of light powder, the neat thing about science is that whatever your hypothesis, without evidence it's just a guess. When somethng can be proven and the results are repeatable, then we have facts.

So far all we have is guesses.

It could be atmostpheric conditions or phases of the moon or the alignment of the planets. No one knows or can tell.

One thing that can be proven, has been proven and is repeatable is this: Light charges of Bullseye do not contain enough explosive force when detonated to cause damage to a revolver.

Hercules Powder Co. did the tests and shared them with the public and the industry in the 1960's. They detonated light charges of Bullseye in a Colt Detective Special and could not damage the gun.

There was just not enough poop in the powder to make it Ka-Boom.

They put out free documents to everyone detailing their tests along with photos and all pertinant data. For some years the myth of light charges of Bullseye blowing up guns was dead.

That's the kind of data we need with the other powders now available. If you can detonate a charge in the gun and it does not damage the gun, then it wasn't a detonation that caused the problem.

I don't know of anyone right off who wants to spend the money on it, though HP White Labs probably have blown up as many guns as anyone. Their data on blowups is quite interesting. So far they have no detonations.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:45 am

I've been using 7.5 grains of Blue Dot in my .357, which is under the load in my loadbook. But it's the most accurate. I'm using magnum primers which I expect would light the powder all at once.

I read about the issue on this website:

http://www.gmdr.com/lever/lowveldata.htm

which seemed to have a lot of good information. They say detonation of this type happens only with powders slower than 2400 powder. The Lee Manual talks about it too, saying again it's only with slow powders. What happens is the primer goes off, and very little powder burns. The bullet pops down the barrel partway and gets stuck. Then the main charge goes off with an obstruction and boom.

I can't see how that could happen with a fast powder, does anybody know the mechanism for it?

Wrangler John · Post by **Wrangler John** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:04 am

Yep, dang near blew myself up with a published starting load of W 296 in the .45 Colt with a 250 grain jacketed bullet. Ran out of magnum primers, so switched to a standard one. Hangfires were quite noticeable, until one round had recoil quite a bit heavier than normal and stuck the case. A gob of partially burned plasticized powder fell out on the bench! Went back to magnum primers and increased the crimp a tad, never had it happen again.

As a result, I never use anything less than mid-range loads for W 296 or H 110, only with magnum primers and heavy crimps, and only then in, the Anaconda, Ruger or custom 5 shot revolvers. It ain't the puffer powders that's the problem, it's those slow ball powders with the heavy deterrent coatings that you gotta watch. Never had any problems with Li'l Gun, AAC 1680, or the 4227's.

Thunder50 · Post by **Thunder50** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:11 am

In case anyone might be interested, I think it would have been impossible to seat two 290gr SWC bullets in a 44 mag case.

When loading the ammo, I would take a bullet and put it in the mouth of the belled case, while in the loading block. Would also be tough to get two bullets in a case that way.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:17 am

All good posts!

I too have experienced the joy of too light charges of H110. It is weird when one goes off POP .. then roars like a rocket taking off JUST AFTER THE BULLET HAS LEFT THE BARREL!! Lots of noise and flame and no recoil.

Weird weird weird pressure symptoms also.

Thunder50 .. you'd have to have a mighty long cartridge case to get 2 of those in it ..

The double-bullet seating I have heard about took place in progressive reloaders. A buildup of bullet lube in the seating die pulled the bullet and left it stuck in the die.

The reloader, not noticing, thought he had forgotten to put a bullet in the case so he inserts another and presto!

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:44 am

A couple years ago I had an unusual experience with a 45-90 load. My procedure is to charge a number of cases, then visually inspect the powder levels to ensure they are all the same, then I seat the bullets. I manually sit the bullet into the slightly belled case mouth, so I cannot seat two bullets into the same case.

I loaded 15 cases with 50 grains of IMR 3031. Cases were about half full. I then seated a 330 grain Gould cast bullet in each one. All shots were chronographed. The bangs were noticeably different for various shots. Here are the chronograph results:

Low Velocity: 1,202 fps
Hi Velocity: 1,744 fps
Average Velocity: 1,590 fps
Extreme Spread: 541 fps
Standard Deviation: 175 fps

I've never, before or since, had such an unusually high extreme spread and poor S.D. I figured it might be the position of the powder in the case, so I then tried 1/2 sheet of toilet paper filler, loosely rolled and folded to keep the powder against the primer. Knowing that this would raise the pressure slightly, I reduced the charge to 48 grains of IMR 3031 and loaded up 5 cartridges. Here are the chronograph results:

Low Velocity: 1,557 fps
Hi Velocity: 1,627 fps
Average Velocity: 1,599 fps
Extreme Spread: 70 fps
Standard Deviation: 28 fps

Big difference. My conclusion was that a half case of IMR 3031 in a 45-90 is not a good idea unless one uses filler to keep the powder against the primer. I wonder if the right amount of powder laying along the bottom side of the case as it sits in the chamber, is kind of like a shaped charge. However, when the primer goes off, you'd think the explosive force of the primer would completely mix up the powder, but maybe for certain grain size and certain amount of emptiness, the shaped charge may occur, putting a lot of pressure against the top part of the chamber. If, however, the powder is against the primer, the pressure goes forward against the base of the bullet which, of course, has give to it.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:01 am

Primers have a lot of power. Mic McPherson can speak to that better than I, but here is a test you can run that I got from him...

With sized, primed cases, seat a bullet normally in a cartrdige and crimp it in place.

Take the other and fill the case with plastic or cardboard wads, seat the bullet so it compresses the wads and crimp it in place.

Depending on the case, the 'empty' case may or may nor break the crimp and move the bullet.

The 'full' case will move the bullet into the bore .. so have a cleaning rod ready to remove it!!

As to what goes on inside the cartridge when the primer fires? Personally with that kind of power I don't see a "flashover" .. but that's just my guess and is worth absolutely nothing.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:34 am

It certainly is hard to believe that flashovers can occur. One thing that I cannot dispute, however, is that powder position does affect burning. I've seen this time and time again when trying loads with and without toilet paper filler. There are many loads, but not all, that show a significantly reduced E.S. and S.D. if the powder is held back against the primer. 2400 does not seem to be position sensitive at all, judging from the E.S.'s I get. The slower powders do seem to be position sensitive .... the slower they are, the more effect I see between loads with and without T.P. fillers. I wouldn't try filler with fast powders and I doubt they would benefit from them anyway. The case I mentioned in my earlier post is an extreme. What we need are hi frame-rate, tiny video cameras inside the case that would record what goes on with the flame front, pressures, etc for different powders and different amounts of powders (and that ain't going to happen).

When all is said and done, I'm still doubtful of detonation, although I cannot argue with very weird, and a little bit scary, burning, given my earlier post on the 45-90 load.

Paul105 · Post by **Paul105** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:37 am

JimT wrote:All good posts!

The double-bullet seating I have heard about took place in progressive reloaders. A buildup of bullet lube in the seating die pulled the bullet and left it stuck in the die.

The reloader, not noticing, thought he had forgotten to put a bullet in the case so he inserts another and presto!

I had this happen recently. I was loading .475 Linebaugh with 400gr WFN over 20gr of 2400. I had placed a bullet in the case at the seating station on my 550B. On the upstroke of the ram, the case in the sizing station was slightly off center and wouldn't enter the sizing die. I lowered the ram to repostion the case under the size die, and the bullet in the crimp die must have stuck at that time. I can attest to the fact that you cannot seat two 400gr WFNs over 20gr of 2400 in the 475 LB case. -- it was a real head scratcher at first, but, I've learned that if something doesn't feel right when operating the 550B, it usually isn't.

FWIW,

Paul

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:31 am

Include me among those who don't buy into detonation. I recall when a fellow took his sixgun apart some years back with the famous 2.7/BE and a full wadcutter bullet (38 Special), there was panic despite millions of this load had been used for generations by Bulleye Target Shooters.

The American Rifleman with the help of H.P. White did extensive testing and it would take a very deeply seated bullet or a double bullet to cause enough pressure to do any harm. I have a copy of the pics and chart they published at the time.

Now, as to the "flash over"...there are some issues here. The primer will get the bullet moving and then the powder will take over with the "big push" as Phil Sharpe calls it. If the bullet stops, even for a nano-second before the "big push" it can act as a bore obstruction.

Now what a bullet/bore obstruction can do, is up for debate. There have been many experiments where multiple rounds are fired with a bullet lodged in the barrel that resulteld in nothing more than a bulged barrel.

The results will be different is you are having free running gas hiting the base of the stuck bullet and if you have another bullet compressing the air between it and the stuck bullet. I am not technical enough to quality what all this difference means.

I once fired a 20 ga shotgun with a live 28 ga shell stuck just ahead of the chamber. Lots of flash, recoil and fire. The barrel was bulged a mite in one spot and the clay bird was broken (Skeet). I continued to use this shotgun for years. BTW... Bill Jordon was shooting in the same squad that day and thought I should have been disqualified as anybody could break the bird with a double charge of shot. He was of course ribbing me.

This is a long way around the mountain to say, that I hold the opinion that almost all "ka-booms" are due to reloading errors and not some mysterious force known as detonation. It is human nature for folks to look beyond their own negligence for answers. "Denial/da Nile is not just river in Africa".

Good shooting... Charles

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:52 pm

Since the squibb experience in my Ruger BH .357mag, and after considerable digging and research, I have to say I don't buy into the "detonation theory" as it is generally and rather loosely applied.

Detonation, as a matter of definition, is making something, (a pipe bomb, an artillery shell, a grenade,) retain pressures of a propellant until it goes BOOM!

So by definition, one who loads a double charge or somehow seats TWO bullets in a case is by essence turning his/her gun into a pipe bomb, and in fact, they are "detonating" it.

As to the topic of powders that don't full a case, I have read and heard that the best way to provide for more even pressures and reduce the chance of a double-charge is to find a powder bulky enough to almost fully fill a case and give you decent velocity and accuracy.

(Here I go again with the Joyce Hornady paraphrase,)
According to Joyce, in my Hornady manual, (which, by the way, lists loads tested in actual guns that they list in the data,) it is better by far to choose a powder that fills the case without having room for that charge to lay on one side and add a variable to your burn rate in that fashion.
It's a big part of the reason manufacturers make powders with different burn rates, and size/shape granules to begin with.

Tailoring a powder for particular size cases and then matching them to different bullet weights to maintain better and more consistent pressures: a novel idea!

As far as the notion that "Man, my gun blowed up... It wasn't my fault." well...

I call BS on that.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:32 pm

I agree with using a slow enough powder to fill the case, which is why I've stayed away from powders like Unique. However, there seems to be an awful lot of loads that use Unique and Bullseye and Titegroup and they seem to work fine. I suspect that the fast powders are not position sensitive and the slow ones are. Slower powders work best when they either fill the case or are held against the primer.

CowboyTutt · Post by **CowboyTutt** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:38 pm

Years ago, I emailed Mic McPherson about the existance of detonations. IIRC, he sweared they do occur, and that he a load, or new someone who did, that could produce one most of the time.

Lately, Mic and Jim Williamson have been sharing their experiences with me for loading the 11mm Mauser in my new 71/84. Mic has discouraged me from using a slower powder than IMR 4198 (I wanted to try some Varget which is recommended in Lyman's 48th for the 45-70 and 45-90) because of the higher risk of detonation and more sensitivity to powder posistion.

So, he at least, still firmly believes in them. At least in a rifle cartridge with lots of space and a slow burning powder. Not really an issue with fast pistol powders in pistol cases.

Anyhow, just thought I would pass this info on.

-Tutt

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:38 pm

KirkD wrote: I suspect that the fast powders are not position sensitive and the slow ones are. Slower powders work best when they either fill the case or are held against the primer.

My guess is that you are correct .. but it's just my guess. However, 50 years of reloading most everything from .25 ACP to .475 Linebaugh, I have to say that I shoot more Bullseye/231/Unique than much anything else.

My .45 Colts for playing are all loaded with small charges of fast powders as are my 38's. 6 gr. fof Bullseye works just wonderfully in the 45 Colt. I have a number of the old balloon-head cases in the 44 Special that I shoot with 3.6 gr. Bullseye under the 250 gr. Keith ... they are tack-drivers and do not seem to be position sensitive.

So .. as I said, I think you're right on with that.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:41 pm

Tutt - rifle cartridges with slow powders are a completely different world than sixgun cartridges. The problem has arisen in the shooting community when people read about what has happened with rifles and try to apply it to the world of sixguns.