I got a telephone call last PM from an obviously concerned & agitated fella about an article I wrote,which mentioned 15gr. milsurp WC 820 (very much like AA #9 and/or H 110) with a 113gr. Lee "wadcutter" in my K-31. The caller claimed "pistol powders" in rifle cartridges cause chamber ringing and wanted to alert me to any "trouble" my article might create. As none of my reloading manuals or magazines have dealt with this, I was doubtful. Is this likely with appropriate charges (never exceeding 1,750fps; no flattening of primers; no ignition problems of any kind) of fast-burning powders in large capacity cases? ...Maven

Paul,

This is an interesting question. I can't remember EVER reading about such happening UNLESS fillers of some sort were used. Chamber or barrel ringing is often mentioned in conjunction with filler use. Fillers are often touted as THE method to keep the powder against the primer, the premise being that the powder MUST be against the primer.

There are many, many such loads shown in the various manuals when dealing with cast bullets. My thought has always been that those loads must be fine (without considering accuracy) UNLESS fillers are used. This is the basis for my prejudice AGAINST fillers.

Of course you knew all that, but your correspondent apparently didn't (doesn't ?).

Maven I have a shooten acquaintence that just blew a case section off the head of said case and stuck it in the chamber. This a straight walled pistol case in a rifle. Filler being grits figuring the powder charge too heavy is my conclusion.

I doubt said fella rang the chamber of modern steel. Did he furnish details minus the 'blame'? Pop the primer etc? Likely too much filler compression along with too much fuel.

Hobie & Aladin, My caller may have confused double-charging a [rifle] cartridge with chamber ringing, but I can't be certain. I, however, have never used or even considered using fillers or "wads" (cut from the subscription cards included in most magazines & pushed down on the powder charge) with powders such as G. Dot, Unique, WC 820 or 2400 in rifle cases. Moreover, I've never had even the slightest indication of poor ignition either. Then too, both Lyman, RCBS and C.E. Harris have advocated their use for CB loads in various rifle calibers. Indeed, Harris' 13gr. R. Dot is practically a "one charge fits all" recommendation. As for fillers, they do work well with certain powders if the charge takes up at least 80% of the case volume. In practice, I use them only in bottle-necked cartridges of .30cal. or larger and only when the powder charge reaches the neck-shoulder junction. Then too, I've discovered as have others, that small amounts low density cereal fillers, e.g., corn meal, grits, and bran have a disporportionately large effect on pressure: 1.3cc is the max. amount I'll use and frequently as little as .3cc. ...Maven

Maven,

Just for curiosities sake, I went through a spreadsheet that I have been building with all of my reloading results for 35 years. I had it sort by powder and then I checked what cartridge I was using it in. I sorted Red Dot, Unique, Green Dot, Blue Dot, HP-38, 700X, H-110, 2400, Scot-453, AA#5, AA#7, AA#9, WC-820, WC-680, etc. I have used these powder in the 270 Winchester, 30-30 Winchester, 7-30 Waters, 22-250 Remington, 223 Remington and the 308 Winchester.

Long before I got into casting bullets, I was using jacketed bullets in reduce loads for all of the above. And I fired BEAUCOUP rounds in each of those calibers with reduced loads, i.e., pistol powders. And ner� a ringed (rung?) chamber did I see. Or maybe I don�t know what too look for and all my chambers are ringed (rung?)!!! Even the infamous H-110 that is to NEVER BE REDUCED, worked quite well in the 30-30 Winchester when fired in the T/C Contender.

It is still my opinion that most, if not all, problems that arise from reduced loads, be it fast burners or slow burners, is caused by error. Can�t prove it, and probably can�t be proved wrong in my thoughts. But then again, maybe BEAUCOUP + ONE, would be the one that rings!!! Actually, the only ringing I have is in my ears�BCB

Hobie, I have used fillers (dacron) in straight wall cases for years. I would not use them in a bottle neck case however. This scares me because I can see it pack against the shoulder.

BCB, I'm in agreement with you on this issue. Cast bullet loads using pistol powders in large capacity cases have been listed in Lyman as well as other reloading manuals for too long for them to have presented a problem. I.e., unless one assumes they did no testing at all and I very much doubt that was the case. Thanks for your support on this one! ...Maven

See also..http://www.gmdr.com/lever/otrail.htm

Maven

In addition to Lyman advocating loads with "green dot" type powders I think a large percentage of shooters who reach the stage of using such loads in 375 H&H etc are very keen reloaders and experimenters and as such if there was a problem then we would have heard of the problem by now.

Mike

Aladin & MIke, By "pistol powders," I generally mean those equal to or faster than 2400. As I've mentioned, George Nonte & C.E. Harris (separately) enthusiastically embraced them, as did Lyman & RCBS. Mike is correct: If there were a problem, we'd have heard of it by now. Btw, in reviewing the results I got with the Lee 113gr. "wadcutter" CB (sized to .309" and seated to the crimp groove) over 15gr. WC 820 in my K-31, I got a mean vel. of 1,763 fps with a SD of 11 fps and an ES of 31 fps. Accuracy was less than 2 m.o.a. with an "as issued" rifle @ 100 yds.; less than 1 m.o.a. @ 50 yds. ...Maven

I was thinking exactly the same. However, technically 2400 is a rifle powder. It and IMR 4227 were both introduced specifically for the .22 Hornet.

I think the controversy,founded or not, is limited to the heavily retarded ball powders in the 296/110/AA-9 category. I don't have enough information to have an opinion as to whether a potential problem exists, but I am not using those powders in reduced loads until things are a lot clearer.

The safety of 2400, 4227, etc in reduced rifle charges is clearly established.