I want to develop some light loads for plinking and targets! Sorry to keep asking silly questions like this but, do Red Dot, Green Dot, Blue Dot, Bullseye, 2400, H4227 or unique pose a risk of Secondary Explosive Effect in very light loads? Are they position sensitive? Do you think a squib is much more likely than SEE?

I refer to loads of loads like this Red dot 5.5grns 170grn RNFP .30-30 between 1000 - 1024fps!
Green Dot as above 6grns, Blue Dot as above 8.0grns!
Bullseye " 5.5grns
2400 " 8grns
H4227 " 10grns
Unique " 9grns

I am petrified of SEE!

Thanks.

This is what I believe happens:

1. If the load is too light, you stick a bullet in the bore.

2. If the load is almost too light, the bullet starts down the bore, stops or almost stops while pressure keeps rising until it is quite a bit higher than it would have had to have been if the bullet just kept moving. If the pressure gets high enough, the bullet starts moving again but you have the so called SEE.

I believe the above scenario can occur with about any powder but it's more likely with a too light load of a slow powder. The only time I've ever had a SEE was with a 454 Casull and a fast pistol powder. Fortunately, the gun I was shooting was very strong so no damage was done to anything.

I have never tried what you're proposing in a .30-30 and I wouldn't try it unless the gun had a quite strong action like a bolt action or a T/C Encore.

Andy, if you want a light load for target practice and plinking, go buy a .22 Long Rifle.
I've known more then one person who's managed to blow up a gun doing what you are describing.


I completely stay away from light loads of fast powders in ANY caliber.

In addition every load will shoot different in your rifle. Are you going to sight it in again everytime you switch between you plinking and hunting loads?

Buy a .22 or a .357 mag carbine for your plinking gun.

For light loads under 1500 fps trail boss is the way to go. Over that I use 5744. Load data is available from Hodgdon and Accurate.

I blew myself up this fall shooting cast rifle an AA5744. Still don't what happened. Was about the 5th pound of that powder I burned over a year and a half period.

Just be advised that spooky stuff can happen, even at about 55% load density.

quote:

I blew myself up this fall shooting cast rifle an AA5744. Still don't what happened. Was about the 5th pound of that powder I burned over a year and a half period.

Just be advised that spooky stuff can happen, even at about 5

Thanks guys, this is why I am asking the questions! Perhaps I should be looking for loads for more like 1400-1600fps rather than subsonic

quote:

For light loads under 1500 fps trail boss is the way to go!

I am really starting to think this myself, it has such a low density that the case will be 70-100% full, theoretically remove any chance of SEE!

The nice thing about Trail Boss is you can not get enough in a case to have problems..

quote:

For light loads under 1500 fps trail boss is the way to go

Yes, for light loads, Tjay has the right answer. I forgot about Trailboss.....

After a little more research into burn rates and density, Blue Dot, 2400, 4227, H4198 and H48955 don't seem so great as subsonic loads!

Where as International, Unique and Universal would appear better suited, but not ideal, having significantly slower burn rates than these powders:

5. Alliant Bullseye 9.398
8 Alliant Red Dot 7.077
14 Hodgdon Clays 6.8408
18 Trailboss 3.046
25 Alliant Green Dot 7.924

With the exception of Bullseye, All of these powder are bulky, Trailboss especially so. I find myself thinking that Trailboss and Red Dot, and possibly Clays, are probably the best choices!

Andy, with the exception of Trailboss, every powder on that list looks like a good way to screw something up. You could screw up something important, your gun, your hand, your face.....any friends of family close to the rifle...

I've been loading for 30+ years, and 15 years of that is with non-canister powders, often with little or no loading data avaliable, and I wouldn't try any of those powders in your last list, except Trailboss....

Thanks for that! Is Red Dot really a bad Idea, I have read a lot online about using Red Dot, granted though it was based on 13 grns "THE LOAD" and for a velocity of around 1600fps!

The only powder other than trailboss i have seen quoted for loads just a bit faster in manuals is unique!

I've know several people who've blown up guns. It's always been with some "light load" with a fast burning powder.

With Red Dot your load density would be down around 33%. That's flashover, double charge load density. I wouldn't try it.

When you put it that way, its not a good idea. I have always been of the opinion that if a load takes up less than 55% of the cartridge its a bad thing.

A lot of these SEE are probably double charges of powder that takes up less than 50%

Most events attributed to SEE are noting but double and triple loads due to oversize egos and sloppy loading practice.

In other words
It is not possible my judgement and technique are wrong, then by definition it has to be SEE.

If you use published data for light/reduced loads from a reliable source such as Lyman (or others) you probably will not experience SEE. I say probably because you have to factor in the SHE, that is, the Shit Happens Effect. Seriously, stick with data from reliable sources and you'll be allright.

quote:

Originally posted by andym79:
I want to develop some light loads for plinking and targets! Sorry to keep asking silly questions like this but, do Red Dot, Green Dot, Blue Dot, Bullseye, 2400, H4227 or unique pose a risk of Secondary Explosive Effect in very light loads? Are they position sensitive? Do you think a squib is much more likely than SEE?

I refer to loads of loads like this Red dot 5.5grns 170grn RNFP .30-30 between 1000 - 1024fps!
Green Dot as above 6grns, Blue Dot as above 8.0grns!
Bullseye " 5.5grns
2400 " 8grns
H4227 " 10grns
Unique " 9grns

I am petrified of SEE!

Thanks.

Just for the record, if you look back to just after WWII, and the 10-20 years afterward when the whole circumstance of SEE began being noticed and seriously studied, it was basically happening in instances of using too light loads of extra-SLOW burning powders, not fast ones. A prime offender was H-4831.

Generally speaking, the literature tends to still support that view. With fast burning powders, the cause is often determined to not be SEE at all, but to be contributed to by "bridging" of powders in powder measure drop tubes, that kind of thing, causing excessive charges. or folks just plain throwing double charges. People also setting their powder measures without the use of a scale was also found to contribute on numerous occasions.

Using faster powders when one wants a reduced load is usually cited as the safe way to AVOID blowups. It seems that like many other things, over recent years a little knowledge (that light loads can cause blowups) has transformed into a less than wholly accurate modern myth because that knowledge doesn't always include the knowledge that it is too light loads with SLOW powders that is involved in creating that particular phenomenon.

For some of the very first printed reports of SEE, scan P.O. Ackley's books. It was a particular fascination of his and he experimented and wrote quite a lot on the subject.

I am NOT flatly saying that blowups never occur with fast burning powders, but that among the forensic firearms folks I have read, SEE with light loads of fast powders is not the source of those disasters. Light loads of slow powders seems to contribute to S.E.E.

It would be very interesting to learn if and under which conditions a SEE is reproducible in experiment.

I can give you a particular powder that seems to have SEE tendencies.
Try AA2495. Pick a standard infantry type cartridge and use the starting loads. Then start backing down the loads one grain at a time.

I blew 3 primers in a 91 Mauser with the original barrel. Increasing the load 3 grains stopped the problem.

SR4759, thanks for the first hand report.

Do you believe you were experiencing a SEE or maybe a Flash over?

Do you recall if your load density was over or under 50%?

One of the complicating problems here is that what is an extra-slow burning powder in one cartridge with one weight of bullet, can actually be a rather fast burning powder with another chambering and another bullet.

Both too slow a powder and too fast a powder can produce very dangerous loads. Blowups (the result) appear the same, but the sequence of physical events producing each can be very different.

The trick is to find and stick to loads which produce consistent burn characteristics in a safe pressure range.

Anything which reduces the consistency of the burn can lead to danger. That could be as simple as using a different bullet, or as complex as using a powder which occupies so little space in a chamber that its position at the time of firing allows it to ignite at a different rate and thereby produce gases in different volumes in a given amount of time depending on how it is "lit" by the primer.

S.E.E. was a term coined especially to refer easily to pressure excursions caused by one sort of phenomenon...too light a load of too slow a powder. But that certainly isn't the only type of condition which lends itself to creating inconsistent burns. So, although we may avoid S.E.E. by using faster powders, that doesn't mean we are home free (free of danger).

More porous powders bulk larger, which helps regards position in the case and the amount of surface area exposed to primer ignition, but too porous means they start burning on more than just the outside of the kernal, which increases the ignition rate.

Smaller grained powders ignite more easily than large grained ones of the same composition, because again they expose more surface area to ignition. Still, if the gun survives the initial powder gas surge produced by small grained powders, it is normally in safe shape because the small kernals more rapidly decrease in surface area during the burn...and the less surface there is to support burning, the more rapid the production of gases drops off.

There are many, many other contributors to unexpected burns of powders, and resulting unexpected volumes of gas in a given amount of time, which produce unexpected pressures...whether too high, or too low.

So, the answer probably is to use a cartridge size, powder burn rate, and so on, designed to produce the velocities we are after with the weights and types of bullets we want to shoot.

Avoiding the extremes of possibilities, whether extremely "hot" loads, or extreme "powder puff" loads is likely the best choice for most folks (including me).

In other words, if I want a rifle shooting a 110 grain bullet at 1,300 fps, I am probably way better off getting a .32-20 for that purpose, than trying to develop similar loads in my .300 Weatherby. And vice-versa vis-a-vis 200 grain bullets at 3,000 f.p.s.

(So, that's what I have done. I have both. Moderate loads do both jobs very safely if I use the right cartridge, powder, and bullet.)

quote:

So, the answer probably is to use a cartridge size, powder burn rate, and so on, designed to produce the velocities we are after with the weights and types of bullets we want to shoot.

Avoiding the extremes of possibilities, whether extremely "hot" loads, or extreme "powder puff" loads is likely the best choice for most folks (includng me).

In other words, if I want a rifle shooting a 110 grain bullet at 1,300 fps, I am probably way better off getting a .32-20 for that purpose, than trying to develop similar loads in my .300 Weatherby. And vice-versa vis-a-vis 200 grain bullets at 3,000 f.p.s.

Well said AC.


Andy, what I think AC is trying to say, is you need a new gun!

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
SR4759, thanks for the first hand report.

Do you believe you were experiencing a SEE or maybe a Flash over?

Do you recall if your load density was over or under 50%?

Both 39 and 40 grains blew primers and enlarged the primer pockets to .220. Yet there was soot all around the case necks due to a lack of sealing

44 grains produced normal pressures.

I do not know what the loading density for this combo is.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

Both 39 and 40 grains blew primers and enlarged the primer pockets to .220. Yet there was soot all around the case necks due to a lack of sealing

44 grains produced normal pressures.

I do not know what the loading density for this combo is.

Am I correct in assuming from your report that you were using bullets of around 144-150 grains weight?

If you were, your density was definitely over 50% of available cartridge capacity. Approximately 60-odd grains (like 65, depending on brand and thickness) is a case completely full of 4895, with no bullet at all.

This was with the Hornady 174 grn RN.
I emailed the lab at AA back then. They treated me like a newbie and I never bought another pound of their powder. They are now all employed elsewhere I suppose since AA was bought by Western Powders.

SEE is a reproduceable phenomonon. I have posted the Handloader article on this several times. It is also in the Handloader Magazine's archives.

It's not a difficult thing to understand and it is not a result of double charges or sloppy loading habits.

andym79

Those loads are safe and will not produce SEE conditions. Cast bullets are soft and will not stick in the barrel as will jacketed bullets. The 2400 and 4227 loads will be "psition sentsitive" and not give as consistent ignition as with the other faster burning powders. SEE is real but there is nothing in your loads that sets up the conditions for an SEE.

Larry Gibson

Have,nt seen the SEE phenomenom up close and personal, but hearing a faint click and seeing a little whisp of smoke rise up from the receiver of a CZ got my attention.
That was one of those moments, that I have,nt forgotten. Remember getting a sick feeling, waiting about half a minute, then slowly opening the bolt. Nice clean case, IMR 4895 spilling neatly out of the case neck onto the magazine follower, a bit onto the feed ramp. No bullet in sight. Pulled the bolt, shook the powder out, tried to look down the barrel, figured out where the bullet was..
Took the gun home, ruined a cleaning rod tryna unstick a bullet the wrong way. Got to spend a little quality time at the gunsmiths..
Asked a lotta questions, which I shoulda done in advance, some more research, got to learn the error of my ways.
9.3x62, starting or light load of 4895, sloppy reloading habits on my part, which I believe, resulted in contamination of the powder, leading up to a flash over.
Jacketed bullet, Speer 270 grain, big hollow lead tube coming out of it after the gunsmith extricated it. The CZ made a full recovery.
Have that bullet, and a jug of 4895 with NFG written across the lid, sitting in the back of the book case in the reloading room. Fine little reminder for me to get a little verification when I get a good idea.
Probly around 30 years of shootin under my belt when that happened, first time I,ve seen it.
Bout 5-6 months reloading experience at the time, not something I want to repeat.
Again, pretty convinced it was user error on my part.
Keep doin the research, don,t be afraid to ask questions.

quote:

Originally posted by Muttly:
Have,nt seen the SEE phenomenom up close and personal, but hearing a faint click and seeing a little whisp of smoke rise up from the receiver of a CZ got my attention.
That was one of those moments, that I have,nt forgotten. Remember getting a sick feeling, waiting about half a minute, then slowly opening the bolt. Nice clean case, IMR 4895 spilling neatly out of the case neck onto the magazine follower, a bit onto the feed ramp. No bullet in sight. Pulled the bolt, shook the powder out, tried to look down the barrel, figured out where the bullet was..
Took the gun home, ruined a cleaning rod tryna unstick a bullet the wrong way. Got to spend a little quality time at the gunsmiths..
Asked a lotta questions, which I shoulda done in advance, some more research, got to learn the error of my ways.
9.3x62, starting or light load of 4895, sloppy reloading habits on my part, which I believe, resulted in contamination of the powder, leading up to a flash over.
Jacketed bullet, Speer 270 grain, big hollow lead tube coming out of it after the gunsmith extricated it. The CZ made a full recovery.
Have that bullet, and a jug of 4895 with NFG written across the lid, sitting in the back of the book case in the reloading room. Fine little reminder for me to get a little verification when I get a good idea.
Probly around 30 years of shootin under my belt when that happened, first time I,ve seen it.
Bout 5-6 months reloading experience at the time, not something I want to repeat.
Again, pretty convinced it was user error on my part.
Keep doin the research, don,t be afraid to ask questions.

What does that 4895 smell like? roger

Hmm.. I,ve always liked the smell of accurate#9, but lemme check.. Bear with me, got a cold, nose,s kinda plugged up..
Open it up, first whiff, smells like ether, bit of a sulfourus smell in there. Another jug of 4895, smell the ether, don,t notice the sulfour smell in the background.
Now you,ve got me curious. Don,t know if I,ve just taken the bait and run with it, or if I got some learnin to do?...
Both?

quote:

Originally posted by Muttly:
Hmm.. I,ve always liked the smell of accurate#9, but lemme check.. Bear with me, got a cold, nose,s kinda plugged up..
Open it up, first whiff, smells like ether, bit of a sulfourus smell in there. Another jug of 4895, smell the ether, don,t notice the sulfour smell in the background.
Now you,ve got me curious. Don,t know if I,ve just taken the bait and run with it, or if I got some learnin to do?...
Both?

I had similar problems with a Jug of 4895. Seems to have resulted from the forfiture of the last rinse of the powder . Resulted in a severe nitric or nitrous acid take over. The oder had a heavy nitirc acid smell. roger

Thank you, Roger!
I,d heard you could tell if powder had gone bad by the smell, but never knew what to look for.
Live and learn..

quote:

I blew myself up this fall shooting cast rifle an AA5744. Still don't what happened. Was about the 5th pound of that powder I burned over a year and a half period.

Sory this happened to you. Can you say double charge? I've just about used up my second pound of AA5744 and I and my rifles are all still intact.

I've been handloading for about 30 years. The first 25 or so were for hunting so I used near max or max loads. I still load these, but hunting loads are shot very little; primarily for sighting in and actually shooting at game.

A few years ago I moved to a rural location AND got into bullet casting. Both of these situations caused me to shoot an incredible amount of ammunition. During one two month period alone, I used almost 1000 large rifle primers shooting a single No.4 Enfield. Since moving out in the country and setting up my own ranges, I've fired literally thousands of reduced loads. Far, far, far more of these than full-power loads. Roughly 1800-2000 of these were loads fired in local High Power (reduced course) matches over the course of a couple of years. Not a problem yet. Probably more than any other powders I've used Red Dot, AL2400 and AA#7. They are in my experience ideal for reduced loads. I use so much of Red Dot and 2400 that I finally bought 4 lb. kegs of each.

quote:

I've know several people who've blown up guns. It's always been with some "light load" with a fast burning powder.

With Red Dot your load density would be down around 33%. That's flashover, double charge load density. I wouldn't try it.

I find it very difficult to belive that one person knows "several" people who have blown up guns, but I'm open minded enough to wait for your evidence. The only danger with Red Dot and similar powders is double charging.

andy79 as I told you on another forum, if you want info on reduced rifle loads, goto a forum where reduced loads are a way of life; either the Cast Bullet Association of Cast Boolit forum.

Don't even consider using "standard" rifle powders for reduced loads. Shotgun/pistol powders are the way to go. And if you're careless, don't consider reduced loads at all. the Lyman 49th Edition manaul is chock full of reduced loads.

35W