Bringing this thread down from Double Rifle as I'm still searching for ideas and answers
Went to the range today to work up CEB loads for my 400 H&H and to put a few rounds down range through my 450NE Gibbs. The loads for my 450NE consisted of Hornady Brass fed 215M primers 100grns of H4831 and 450gr CEB NCs. Also loaded for my 450NE HDS Brass (Huntington) fed 215M 100grns H4831 and 480grn Woodleigh Softs. The Woodleigh load has been a mainstay through this gun producing approx 2120fps and good accuracy. All of the loads shot today were loaded during the same loading session. Each round hand weighed using a RCBS 1010 scale. While I was letting the 400 cool I would put a few rounds down range with the Double. Put 6 of the CEB rounds down range then back to the 400 for a bit picked the double up again put 2 of the Woodlieghs down range then the next pair caught me by surprise both were extremely hot the gun was diffulcult to open and the primers were cratered. Shot 2 more no problem then 2 more after that and again hot loads. when I got home pulled the remaining Woodleigh loads all had 100grns of H4831 right OAL weighed and measured the bullets and could not find any conflict.....I've easily put 200 rounds of the Woodleigh loads through this gun.....
Any thoughts would be of great help
Temp today was 85*f in the sun ammo was in the shade
Some further thoughts.....
As I have reviewed the days events the report from the "hot rounds" sounded like a hang fire "baarang" and the rounds point of impact was the same as the others fired earlier.
*First time using Fed 215M primers before all loads were with Fed 215 changed to the 215M as I need more primers and thought that it was a better primer than the 215.
*Possible blockage of flash hole with walnut tumbling media
*Most of us re-loaders for Double guns have been using Fed 215s as they are one of the hotter primers on the market and we have large collums of powder to ignite are there hotter primers now on the market?? I have heard that the new Win mag primer is hotter??

Any help with matter would be greatly appreciated.......

Zephyr, I'm not a shooter of the big doubles, but based on your description, my first thought would also run toward higher then expected pressures.

If it was my rifle, I'd back off to about 90 grain behind the CEB's and work up from there. If that fixed the problem, I would know it was pressure, if not, well, I'd have to look at something else.

In my experience the 215's are hotter then the 215m's. I typically shoot ball powders with the 215, and in this instance, the 215's print better groups. I usually shoot the WMRP's with heavy charges of H4831. They seem to print better groups, and a have a better stock pile of them as well.

PS, I'd shoot the workup loads over a chronograph to see if my velocities were in the expected range, or on the high side.

It may or may not be relevant but I found HDS cases in the .425 WR to be a little soft. The cratered primers are another matter. roger

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
Zephyr, I'm not a shooter of the big doubles, but based on your description, my first thought would also run toward higher then expected pressures.

If it was my rifle, I'd back off to about 90 grain behind the CEB's and work up from there. If that fixed the problem, I would know it was pressure, if not, well, I'd have to look at something else.

In my experience the 215's are hotter then the 215m's. I typically shoot ball powders with the 215, and in this instance, the 215's print better groups. I usually shoot the WMRP's with heavy charges of H4831. They seem to print better groups, and a have a better stock pile of them as well.

PS, I'd shoot the workup loads over a chronograph to see if my velocities were in the expected range, or on the high side.

It was the Woodleigh loads that gave me the trouble I have put 200 or so rounds of this load through this gun no problem

Thanks for clarifying. Since the Woodleighs are the heavier bullet, it makes more sense you would have pressure issues with them.

30 more grains of bullet can add a significant amount of pressure. Since you've never worked up with this bullet, doing so if probably a good idea.

As mentioned in the opening paragraph I've have put close to 200 rnds of the Woodleigh load through the gun so the load has been tried and proved...
I'm still thinking partially blocked flash hole or perhaps a loose primer pocket
Thanks for your input every though is greatly appreciated as I try ane problem solve this incident...

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
Thanks for clarifying. Since the Woodleighs are the heavier bullet, it makes more sense you would have pressure issues with them.

30 more grains of bullet can add a significant amount of pressure. Since you've never worked up with this bullet, doing so if probably a good idea.

I would assume you check your flashholes before you prime???

Besides, why would only the flashholes of the Woodleigh bullets have a few that were plugged??

Did you change anything other then primers, such as brass, or your Lot of powder. Did you finish up a keg of H4831 you were using for the last 10 years and replace it with a new one that might be a little warmer?

Just some idea's.

troubleshooting basics where typically reliable operation suddenly changes focusses on what is different with the troublesome loads.

To say that the " woodleigh load has been tried & proved" is not strictly correct, in that you used a different primer .
I note from the other thread that you have checked projectile diameter consistency in the batch you are using , that the cases were trimmed before loading, and you have checked remaining loads for powder weight.
The sequence of "troubles" with :-
-2 OK
- 2 HP & sticky action
-2 OK
- 2 again HP & sticky
leads to a level of randomness that raises doubt about the potential for polishing media being the cause ( but its not impossible).

The primary suspect is the component you deliberately changed being marginal in adequate function...........supported by your comment that the rounds that gave trouble sounded sort of like hangfires.

You don't advise however whether the 2 x 2 discharges that were OK gave any visible signs of altered ignition in primer appearance.
even so this is not conclusive.
If you have not changed your polishing media this also draws doubt on it being a cause of the troubles.
( if you did change it or its appearance is indicative of difference in size of the media batch used ......it could be a contributor , but the nature of the 'ordered' troubles
ie
2 x 2 x2 x2 mitigates against that.

First of all I would be inclined to go back to using the actual proven load using the 215 primers rather than the 215M that was the component change in the event.

IF I wanted to trouble shoot the current reload situation.........
The sequence I would use to troubleshoot would be
- inspection of the individual cases for uniformity & cleanliness to remove any doubt about the media interfering with the primer hole.
- careful 'feel' in primer seating when reloading the cases which suffered the 'troubles' to again remove any doubts about primer seat condition.
- Reduce loads and work back up looking for pressure variations, indicative of marginal ignition of the powder column.
- I would use another batch of the 215M to remove primer batch variation from the equation.
- see what you find.

Honestly tho , for the cost involved I would go back to exact components that you have found successful & forget the 215M use.

ie
when 'on a good thing' stick with it unless forced to substitute.

Marginal primer performance in ignition leads initially to group size changes when the influence on ignition is minor & to larger effects dependent on the situation of the day & the characteristics of the load itself.
With large calibres & the number of rounds fired it can be difficult to appreciate changes in accuracy in rounds that don't give pressure 'troubles' that indicate the primer choice is marginal for the duty ( rather than holding the same general POI).

FWIW

Antelope Sniper
Thanks for your interest....
to answer your questions
*if the culprit was a contaminated flash hole then it was random and I checked the primer pocket but not the flash hole
*Powder lot was the same
*Brass was the same but I am ashamed to say I have lost count of how many reloads with the HDS brass and I'm wondering whether it could have been a loose primer pocket.
*Primers I did change...I went from the Fed 215 to Fed 215M.
I am coming to the conclusion that my problem is stemming from a faulty ignition source that perhaps created an erratic burn and a hang fire...Where it came from it's still a puzzle I thought that more folks would have spoke up ...Here is what I'm thinking
* Can a worn primer pocket cause erratic ignition
*can a partially blocked flash hole cause erratic ignition.
*could I have just had a bad primer if so how do i check the others in the box
thought I would give Hodgdons a call on Monday and ask them fore their thoughts...
thanks again for your interest....

HotCore got more pages then you got responses....

Go figure.

For the SuperMagnum, I do prefer the 215's over the 215m's. I load almost 100gr of non-caniser powder in the STW, and although I don't recall ever having a hangfire with the "m"'s, my groups did open up. Consequently I've gone back to, and stuck with the regular 215's.

quote:

Originally posted by Zephyr:
Antelope Sniper
Thanks for your interest....
to answer your questions
*if the culprit was a contaminated flash hole then it was random and I checked the primer pocket but not the flash hole
Again its a case of assessing random contamination & random selection that leads to 2 OK 2 HP 2 OK 2 HP thats somewhat ordered & a low value correlation Its a somewhat ordered series whatever the cause ..........so a low value correlation for any cause. Troubleshooting involves repeating with absolute exclusion of contamination & seeing if the events repeat If they don't then random contamination can reasonably be assigned as the cause ..........it can be media contamination , excess sizing lubricant etc etc


*Powder lot was the same
*Brass was the same but I am ashamed to say I have lost count of how many reloads with the HDS brass and I'm wondering whether it could have been a loose primer pocket.
4 x loose primer pockets ???? examination of the culprit cases & inserting new primers with "feel" should sort that out as real or not.

*Primers I did change...I went from the Fed 215 to Fed 215M.
I am coming to the conclusion that my problem is stemming from a faulty ignition source that perhaps created an erratic burn and a hang fire...Where it came from it's still a puzzle I thought that more folks would have spoke up ...Here is what I'm thinking
* Can a worn primer pocket cause erratic ignition
Maybe , but more a false indicator of a high pressure load
*can a partially blocked flash hole cause erratic ignition.
Maybe
*could I have just had a bad primer if so how do i check the others in the box
Put primers in packet aside reload with primers from another batch from another source. no repeat events indicates a primer batch issue, repeats indicate primer unsuitable for the duty No repeat events from another packet of primers forget sorting out which are good & which are bad ..........dispose of the packet.......how much are you out of pocket.


thought I would give Hodgdons a call on Monday and ask them fore their thoughts...
thanks again for your interest....

At the end of the day we all try different things, we keep those that work & move on from those that create issues. Its nice to know what actually caused a "problem" , but where components that are proven performers are available its often more trouble than its worth to anally investigate the cause while subjecting a nice double to potential overpressure discharges.

Been there done that persisting with trying to isolate a "problem", technically ( no Double tho)........don't ask about the risks involved.........they all involve expense.
Isolating technical causes is a worthwhile exercise when a proven solution is not available
A hundred or so reloads you have done using components that did not create issues looks a pretty good solution to me.

KISS solutions are usually best.

Just my thoughts FWIW

quote:

DenisB

DenisB Thanks for a more analytical view which seems to be tempered with a voice of reason....
Enjoy your summer