quote:

Originally posted by hawkins:
One fact is certain; When the case head expands
the brass has reached its yield stress. With that brass.
with that load, in that chamber it is time to
start thinking about what you are doing.
Good luck!

excellent post....well said...
For those that claim CHE is worthless, I must assume they have forgotten reloading and are into measuring PSI only.....CHE tells us nothing about pressure in PSI or CUP as I said earlier.....and used alone is also worthless...it's one of the items in the bag of tricks commonly used by reloaders to determine their load's safety levels.

The more I read these articles and posts on pressure measuring the more I reject the entire idea as folly.....I'm less and less concerned about pressure anymore.....but then I'm using the loads in very strong push feed rifles such as M-70 and M-700

Just watch now.....someone will bring up the idea of using steel cases.....exit stage right!

quote:

Of course we would only be able to use each case just once ….

When I say anneal I mean the whole case. That means they will then deform on each firing to a un-reload able degree. (It did when I annealed them!) I dried some washed cases in the oven and forgot them there. They did not discolour but they got real soft. I didn't know until I fired the first one and the gun didn't cycle or something was different that made me look - maybe I just looked out of habit. The degree of bulging of the case head - that's the part I left out - was quite substantial but it was a normal load (not hot-hot).

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:


The more I read these articles and posts on pressure measuring the more I reject the entire idea as folly.....I'm less and less concerned about pressure anymore.....but then I'm using the loads in very strong push feed rifles such as M-70 and M-700

The human mind will not stop worrying about something because someone else says not to worry.
Those that think absolute pressure in meaningful to a handloader in his strong rifle will put value in the kind of stuff Denton used to post here.

"If the weak link is the brass, monitor the brass."
That is too bold and complicated for most handloader forum contributors.
This forum is better than most, but is getting dumber, even though Denton is gone.


What does it all mean?
Most people are too dumb to discuss case head expansion.
Denton has an engineering degree. He can do the math, he just can't reason.
There is no way to screen out dumb.
It is not against the law to be wrong.
We cannot get Denton arrested for being wrong.
And there are thousands more like him.


The only way to deal with such dumb people is to have Hot Core flame in their face.

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
(It did when I annealed them!) I dried some washed cases in the oven and forgot them there. They did not discolour but they got real soft. ).

That's one hot oven roger

tnekkcc, you have done plenty of 'destructive testing', so you are qualified to comment on the relationship between case head expansion, action strength, brass strength etc. I really would appreciate you sharing your knowledge here. (I am not going to rush out and do some 'testing' of my own, I am just very interested in the 'how's' and 'why's' for the sake of understanding).

quote:

That's one hot oven

No, not too hot. Just an overnight stay! I was only trying to evaporate water. The oven temp was set at a little over boiling point. Like I said, there were no visible signs of annealing - discolouration or whatever.

tnekkcc

The problem is "the weak link is the brass". This is not always the weak link. Just because you have a "push feed" action and your brass case is holding up to 75,000+ psi loads does not make it prudent to shoot those loads continuously in that rifle. Some modern magnums have MAPs of 65,000 psi. The cases for such magnums do not show CHE until well above that range, usually well into "proof load" range. Some actions can take that pressure MAP pressure on a regular basis but none are rated to have a continual diet of proof loads.

That of course is my opinion and yours is obviously different. I just wanted others to be aware of that problem with CHE. As CHE does not measure the actual pressure you still don't know if you are within safe boundaries for the brass cases and the action.

It's not that Denton is "dumb" and "can't reason". It is simply that Denton reasons differently than you do. Many on his side of the fence think you and others can't reason either and are dumb. I don't think that of you. However, since you have recommended the theory of loading cartridges up until the primer blows and then backing off......well perhaps that theory should lend whatever credence you have to your calling other people "dumb".

Larry Gibson

Larry,
I participated in a psychology experiment at the University of Washington with 100 college seniors in 1976.
The experiment was to give a test to the individuals with a set of questions, then break them up into 10 groups and test the groups with the same questions.
I tested the highest, then another individual, then the 10 groups, then the other 98 seniors.

What does it all mean?
There are ~ 2% people out there that can't seem to get through to the other 98%.
Denton should reason better.
I should be more convincing.

You could do what I do. Go to the Puyallup gun show and buy a few hundred guns. Blow them up...er try to blow them up. Record your findings. Then check your results against common gun culture folk lore like load books and Denton's fears.

Then try to dispel the errors in the gun culture.

Try to make a difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
...Some modern magnums have MAPs of 65,000 psi. The cases for such magnums do not show CHE until well above that range, usually well into "proof load" range. ...

The problem here folks is that 65kpsi was(to be accurate) based on a reading from a non-calibrated, guessed at dimension, fudge factored, totally worthless HSGS.

I've seen that comment before and it ALWAYS comes from someone who got PT Barnumed into getting a HSGS fiasco. And I know who originally uttered such total and complete ignorance. I however do not blame larry in this particular situation, cause I've seen this Fairy Tale before - aka worthless info.

I've also seen the comment Boltman made concerning the great Reloading Guru Mr. Ken Waters about saying he no longer supported CHE & PRE. The last time I tracked this back, it stemed from a comment made by ken howl(el grande blowhard extrodinair - without peer). I feel sure howl "made it up", because I know him way too well from the old Hunt America Board.

Good old CHE & PRE work - always have - always will.

Hey tnekkcc, Glad to see you wade in.

quote:

You could do what I do. Go to the Puyallup gun show and buy a few hundred guns. Blow them up...er try to blow them up. Record your findings. Then check your results against common gun culture folk lore like load books and Denton's fears.

tnekkcc

I guess some are in that 2%......I try to get to the Puyallup Gun Show whenever I can. However I also try not to blow them up or even try to blow them up. I guess that's the difference between the rest of us in that 98% bracket and those of you in the 2% bracket.

Larry Gibson

Hot Core

You can keep saying all the BS you want about the Oehler M43 or similar systems. Doesn't mean it's correct. It only means you're still stuck on something that is unreliable, CHE, and refuse to believe that there is any scientific instruments out there that can measure or provide any better pressure information. Unfortuneately you don't also understand that such statements only adversely reflect on your own credibility let alone integrity.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
Hot Core

You can keep saying all the BS you want about the Oehler M43 or similar systems. Doesn't mean it's correct. It only means you're still stuck on something that is unreliable, CHE, and refuse to believe that there is any scientific instruments out there that can measure or provide any better pressure information. Unfortuneately you don't also understand that such statements only adversely reflect on your own credibility let alone integrity.

Larry Gibson

At least from my viewpoint Hot Core is doing a lot better than you are. He survived Denton and will survive you too.

tnekkc; If you have in fact tested hundreds of
actions to "blow up" would you release the
data? I for one would purchase such a treasure
trove of information.Pictures would also help.
Take care!

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
You can keep saying all the BS you want about the Oehler M43 or similar systems. Doesn't mean it's correct.

I do believe it would be a fine "tool" when properly Calibrated, using a correctly measured Chamber Wall thickness, with the Fudge Factor(Correction Factor) recognized and with the System located in a Lab Environment. Otherwise, people who buy them are simply fooling themselves as to the accuracy and usefulness of the (incorrect) info the HSGS fiascos spew forth.

quote:

It only means you're still stuck on something that is unreliable, CHE,

Good old never-fail, always reliable, venerable and versital CHE, PRE and GE.

quote:

Unfortuneately you don't also understand that such statements only adversely reflect on your own credibility let alone integrity.

As long as it does that with the people who have been "duped" into buying a HSGS fiasco, that is fine with me. Otherwise, the rest of the world will continue to use good old, never fail, always reliable, venerable andversitle CHE, PRE and GE.

Hey Rolltop, How's it going?

Rolltop

It's easy to survive on a forum such as this. All you have to do is keep posting the same thing over and over. I guess both Hot Core and I are pretty good at that. I shall be here as long as it takes. Too bad he and you don't understand or accept facts as conducted by actual tests. His continual crap about "calibration" is just that. The PBL is calibrated when manufactured. If you think that any pressure device is "calibrated" by adjusting something the psi measures what some reference ammuntion is supposed to have you are as wrong as Hot Core.

All the pressure devices used by the ammunition manufactures (some in labs and some on a range - just like me) who use "reference ammuntion" use the the difference in what the psi is supposed to be and what their machine says it is as an "offset" or "correction/fudge factor" as Hot Core calls it. Now Hot Core only "assumes" that I have not used "reference" ammuntion to verify the readings of my PBL. Such is not the case. I have used such. Winchester makes it and it is quite expensive. I also have compared pressures from my PBL with those of several different lots of Federal ammuntion of which they were kind enough to give me the actual pressures they recorded. The pressures I recorded were quite within SAAMI varience from those "reference" ammuntions. Also Dr. Oehler has conducted a very extesive test with numerous types of pressure measuring devices all hooked to the same SAAMI spec pressure barrel. He was able to measure the pressure of a load simultaneously whith all the currently used methods. His results are quite enlightening. I do wish he would publish that article of his test and findings.

You might ask Hot Core what "calibration" he uses for his brass cases. Actually he avoids that because there isn't any. So his use of a double standard makes his method correct? Not hardly. CHE is proven invalid. It does sometimes work but you'll never know when that time is as there is no calibration or "reference" cartridge cases to judge CHE by. I've also given ample proof where using CHE as a standard can very well mean you are shooting over pressure loads, sometimes close to proof loads. Some like Hot Core and tnekkcc advise that that is ok. However most of us, including all of the industry ballisticians, do not.

BTW; it appears Hot Core has not survived Denton as Denton's material is still used here by many to refute Hot Core's CHE.

I too shall be here and continue to Refute Hot Core's invalid CHE method. The difference between he and I is I will use facts. Hot Core only uses assumptions - wrong ones at that.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
You can keep saying all the BS you want about the Oehler M43 or similar systems. Doesn't mean it's correct.

I do believe it would be a fine "tool" when properly Calibrated, using a correctly measured Chamber Wall thickness, with the Fudge Factor(Correction Factor) recognized and with the System located in a Lab Environment. Otherwise, people who buy them are simply fooling themselves as to the accuracy and usefulness of the (incorrect) info the HSGS fiascos spew forth.

quote:

It only means you're still stuck on something that is unreliable, CHE,

Good old never-fail, always reliable, venerable and versital CHE, PRE and GE.

quote:

Unfortuneately you don't also understand that such statements only adversely reflect on your own credibility let alone integrity.

As long as it does that with the people who have been "duped" into buying a HSGS fiasco, that is fine with me. Otherwise, the rest of the world will continue to use good old, never fail, always reliable, venerable andversitle CHE, PRE and GE.

Hey Rolltop, How's it going?

Hot Core

Can't you at least come up with something new? Or interesting? Same old garbage every time is somewhat boring. If you think you'll bore me off of here you're wrong as usual.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
...You might ask Hot Core what "calibration" he uses for his brass cases. Actually he avoids that because there isn't any. So his use of a double standard makes his method correct? Not hardly. CHE is proven invalid. It does sometimes work but you'll never know when that time is as there is no calibration or "reference" cartridge cases to judge CHE by. I've also given ample proof where using CHE as a standard can very well mean you are shooting over pressure loads, sometimes close to proof loads. Some like Hot Core and tnekkcc advise that that is ok. However most of us, including all of the industry ballisticians, do not.

Totally and completely wrong. Sure you Calibrate for CHE & PRE. And you also use a Benchmark Standard as a reference to know when you have reached a SAFE MAX Load.

It is all in the Link, but it seems some have a reading comprehension problem. Or perhaps it is simply the education background for some does not cover the Math, Physics and understanding of the Materials involved. Nothing for the d-e r-rs to be ashamed of when they are simply ignorant concerning such subjects. However, hanging on to PT Barnumed concepts does carry them on into a pitiful area.

quote:

Denton's material is still used here by many to refute Hot Core's CHE.

Using totally incorrect, skewed and false info to "refute" anything only makes a Fool of the person who doesn't understand how little denton actually knows. It is a big Joke to those who actually understand, but there are Fools who bring denton's ignorance into conversations. Here is the Achilles' heel of using denton's vast knowledge - The World's most Ignorant Reloading Suggestion. I can see why a d-e r-r would worship denton's vast reloading moxie.

quote:

but it seems some have a reading comprehension problem

Hot core

Good bit of self analysis there. Congradulations on getting something right.

Larry Gibson