Onefunzr2 posted a request for someone to do some measurements on a few cases that he had ran through his Oehler. The measurements were taken (by me) according to HotCore's test procedure. We mailed cases back and forth that were marked with an engraving pencil and a sharpie. We performed this as sort of a 'blind' test with neither of us knowing what the other was recording and agreed to post the results here for everybody to see.

Here's the PM that I just sent onefunzr2. The formatting on this board does not seem to allow for tabs and such so I will explain a little. The cases were numbered 1-7 and I listed the deltas beside the case numbers. If anyone is interested, I have the .xls file where you can see the pre- and post- measurements and I would be happy to send it to you.

I am a raw rookie at this technique but I have been using measurement equipment to the tenths of thousandths for 30 yrs so I'm sure the measurements are within reason. The analysis of the data is another thing.

Hopefully some of the more experienced folks will weigh in on what they think. I hope we can correlate some of this to the pressure and/or velocity readings.

PM follows:

According to the PRE theory, all of the subjects failed the comparison to the Factory Standard Pressure Values. Here's the breakdown:

Case # - expansion

1 - 0.0005
2 - 0.0006
3 - 0.0006
4 - 0.0006
5 - 0.0004
6 - 0.0008
7 - 0.0007

Next would be the EGE measurements. I'm not sure what the 'limits' would be for EGE but here are the deltas:

Case # - expansion

1 - 0.0006
2 - 0.0008
3 - 0.0003
4 - 0.0004
5 - 0.0007
6 - 0.0023
7 - 0.0010

Finally, the CHE values. According to HC's procedure, you should stop when .0005 - .0007 CHE is reached. As you can see below, only case #1 falls under the .0005 so the rest of them should be considered 'overs'.

Case # - expansion

1 - 0.0004
2 - 0.0015
3 - 0.0009
4 - 0.0008
5 - 0.0012
6 - 0.0029
7 - 0.0013

Here's another analysis that I ran to see how the three measurements correlated. You can see that #2, #7, and #6 rise to the top and would probably be assumed to be overpressure. #5 would also fit in there on two of the three categories but the others sort of bounce around.

CHE EGE PRE VEL PSI

-1----3----5----3----4
-4----4----4----4----3
-3----1----1----1----1
-5----5----3----5----5
-7----2----2----6----2
-2----7----7----7----7
-6----6----6----2----6


A lot of data. Seems to make some sense statistically. Edited to add how the PRE/EGE/CHE measurements compare to the velocities and PSI readings that you logged.

Looks like #5 was at 56,200 a little over the 54,700 psi that you mentioned.

Cool. Thanks Dave. It was my pleasure. It was an interesting experiment.

That Federal factory ammo only reading 41K seems pretty low compared to SAAMI maxes yet the speeds are up there pretty close to where they advertise them to be ( http://www.federalpremium.com/...ls/rifle.aspx?id=207 ). What (if anything) should we make of that?

It is no wonder all of the loads that I measured showed 'too much' PRE as compared to the Factory Standard Pressure Value which was derived from the average of the once-fireds.

I will try to run your loads through QuickLoad when I get home tonight to see if there's a correlation between the Oehler and the QL predictions.

That moly allows you to drive those 52grainers pretty doggone fast!

Ran the QuickLoad program with your setup and its output was:

27.7gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets

3506fps @ 65Kpsi

26.9gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets

3429fps @ 58.8Kpsi

Both of which are displayed as 'dangerous loads'.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Looks like #5 was at 56,200 a little over the 54,700 psi that you mentioned.

Just for you, SR4759.

quote:

You will note that shots 1,3,4 and 5 were measured just under SAAMI MAX pressure average of 54,700 psi (M43)

I'll be glad to define the term 'average' for you if you wish.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Looks like #5 was at 56,200 a little over the 54,700 psi that you mentioned.

Just for you, SR4759.

quote:

You will note that shots 1,3,4 and 5 were measured just under SAAMI MAX pressure average of 54,700 psi (M43)

I'll be glad to define the term 'average' for you if you wish.

Please define the word "measured" as used in the sentence above.

You said measured way before you mentioned average and it was not "averaged".....

I too, am curious about round number 5. Since that particular round is clearly above the limit, did it have any unusual charastics to it that might be observed? Obviously the CHE and physically measured protions showed no signs of over-pressure, were there any indications that those without the M43 could observe, bolt lift, flattened primers, etc.

I have no dog in the fight, I and truely just curious. I will admit to having never measured any of this stuff.

Damn! This is good stuff! Thanks very much for thinking this through and doing the work. It will take me a while to digest all the information. Does quickload have info. and are there SAAMI specs for the Improved chambering? Again, this is good stuff.
Peter.

Quickload does have the 223AI listed. It uses 50K PSI CUP as a limit. Part of the reason for my interest in this caliber is that the straighter case walls can mask many of the popular pressure signs. Many 223AI shooters just like to 40gr 4Kfps aspect. Shooting heavy for caliber bullets at long distances, I like cranking on this chambering but I do not want to blow anything up.

This thread and related threads is all about the relationship between strain gauge PSI and case head expansion or CHE.
When you use the same brass with a slightly different shoulder shape it does not change the strength of any of the pressure containing components.
Wouldn't it be reasonable for the 223AI to have exactly the same pressure limitations as the 223?

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
This thread and related threads is all about the relationship between strain gauge PSI and case head expansion or CHE.
When you use the same brass with a slightly different shoulder shape it does not change the strength of any of the pressure containing components.
Wouldn't it be reasonable for the 223AI to have exactly the same pressure limitations as the 223?

Not sure when you are changing the shape of the pressure vessel? Does the 40° shoulder change the properties of the explosion? QL seems to think the pressure limits are the same and I'm not going to argue that point. What I have seen is that the traditional signs of pressure show up much earlier in the 223 parent case than they do in the AI'd versions.

Kelbo, I probably have as much experience with Ackley Improved cartridges as anyone on this board. I can report that AI cases fail at the same pressures as non-AI cases - that is, ejector mark impressions and primer pockets begin to loosen fairly quickly once you hit 65,000 PSI and one encounters first-fire blown primers at 75,000 PSI to 80,000 PSI. The pressure is going to be distributed equally within the contained vessel. Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Kelbo, I probably have as much experience with Ackley Improved cartridges as anyone on this board. I can report that AI cases fail at the same pressures as non-AI cases - that is, ejector mark impressions and primer pockets begin to loosen fairly quickly once you hit 65,000 PSI and one encounters first-fire blown primers at 75,000 PSI to 80,000 PSI. The pressure is going to be distributed equally within the contained vessel. Regards, AIU

AIU, I'm not sure then why I can load another ~2 gr of powder and get 100-200fps more velocity in the 223AI case than with a standard 223 case without seeing traditional pressure signs. I constantly read that the pressure is related to the fps. Does that mean that all of the AIs running faster than the parent cartridge are also running higher pressures? Possibly dangerous pressures? That's my purpose here. Looking for more indicators on the 223AI to prevent blowing up two actions. I also like my brass to last a long time .

Supposed to be on a weekend getaway. Next time, I bet the wife makes sure the resort DOES NOT have free wireless .

Velocity is relate to mean pressure, not peak pressure, which is what is stressing the case. Often, mean pressure is higher when peak pressure is higher. The larger case of the AI reduces peak pressure and adding more powder increases mean pressure without raising peak pressure above what the smaller case would have been subjected to. Hope that helps.

Kelbo,

Quick rule-of-thumb is 4% increase in powder for a 1% increase in velocity, although the mildly expanded case capacity may allow you to optimize use of a slower burning powder, which may exceed the 1%. Using more slow-burning powder will provide more velocity, while peck PSI stays at 65,000 PSI. But, I think "Wildcatters" tend to run higher PSIs, but then most are using custom well-made bolt-action rifles and, thus, remain safe.

If you're using a modern well-built bolt-action rifle, it should take well over 150,000 PSI to blow it up. You'll blow your primer pockets at ~80,000 PSI - long before you blow up your bolt action. Also, at these higher PSIs barrel accuracy deteriorates rapidly, thus I'd avoid these high PSIs for routine shooting. For targets, I'd suggest running at 50,000 PSI (or below) where you should have accuracy as well long case and barrel life. For long-range hunting, I'd load up to 65,000 PSI and Quick Load should provide some decent load recommendations. Shoot these high-performance loads only when needed.

Make sense?

Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:
Velocity is relate to mean pressure, not peak pressure, which is what is stressing the case. Often, mean pressure is higher when peak pressure is higher. The larger case of the AI reduces peak pressure and adding more powder increases mean pressure without raising peak pressure above what the smaller case would have been subjected to. Hope that helps.

That's what I was thinking. The area under the curve is lengthened. Like the performance they are claiming RE17 delivers.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Kelbo,

Quick rule-of-thumb is 4% increase in powder for a 1% increase in velocity, although the mildly expanded case capacity may allow you to optimize use of a slower burning powder, which may exceed the 1%. Using more slow-burning powder will provide more velocity, while peck PSI stays at 65,000 PSI. But, I think "Wildcatters" tend to run higher PSIs, but then most are using custom well-made bolt-action rifles and, thus, remain safe.

If you're using a modern well-built bolt-action rifle, it should take well over 150,000 PSI to blow it up. You'll blow your primer pockets at ~80,000 PSI - long before you blow up your bolt action. Also, at these higher PSIs barrel accuracy deteriorates rapidly, thus I'd avoid these high PSIs for routine shooting. For targets, I'd suggest running at 50,000 PSI (or below) where you should have accuracy as well long case and barrel life. For long-range hunting, I'd load up to 65,000 PSI and Quick Load should provide some decent load recommendations. Shoot these high-performance loads only when needed.

Make sense?

Regards, AIU

Thanks. My most accurate load generates (according to QL) right at 60K psi. The primer pockets hold out for 5 or 6 loads before they are too loose for my comfort. Good enough for these desert coyotes at 200yds. They might do one spin and then they drop!

Late update. Just wanted to close the loop. Cases 1,3,4 and 5 all had 'fairly' loose primer pockets. 2,6, and 7 had primer pockets loose enough to almost push a Win SR primer completely in with my thumb.

quote:

Originally posted by kelbro:
Late update. Just wanted to close the loop. Cases 1,3,4 and 5 all had 'fairly' loose primer pockets. 2,6, and 7 had primer pockets loose enough to almost push a Win SR primer completely in with my thumb.

Kelbro, according to the M43 how much PSI was each case you mention above exposed to? Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:

quote:

Originally posted by kelbro:
Late update. Just wanted to close the loop. Cases 1,3,4 and 5 all had 'fairly' loose primer pockets. 2,6, and 7 had primer pockets loose enough to almost push a Win SR primer completely in with my thumb.

Kelbro, according to the M43 how much PSI was each case you mention above exposed to? Regards, AIU

I don't know. Onefunzr had posted several M43 printouts with all of the data as the second post in this thread but it seems to have been deleted.

Find Key: CHEgloating

Looks like onefunz has decided his highly controlled Test ended up confirming what most of the Senior Members knew all along. Due to that he has pulled his info down like a 5-year old (taken his ball and gone home), but fortunately - " I " - have the pertinent stuff from his now Deleted posts.

Good old EGG/CHE/PRE has never been improved upon by even the most costly electronic devices a person can buy. As has been said repeatedly, the M43 is an excellent tool inside a Lab, where measurements are accurate and it is able to be Calibrated. Outside a Lab, any Haphazard SGS is a complete and total waste of money. You might as will go to a Palm Reader as have wasted your $2500-$5000 on one - as the Test totally confirmed. GLOAT

I'd intended to do this in a PM to the parties involved so Bartsche would not stroke-out on us, But since the good stuff has been deleted, I'll re-add the important parts and if Bartsche has a stroke - it happens.

I'll list below what was originally posted as Extractor Groove Expansion(EGE)[what I call EGG], good old never-fail, always-faithful, completely-repeatable, relatively-inexpensive and totally-accurate Case Head Expansion(CHE), Velocity(totally worthless when making a Pressure decision) and the M43 Pressure(non-calibrated, guessed at dimensions, fudge factored, misleading and pretty much totally worthless info - as will be shown). GLOAT

As the Test worked out, onefunz asked Kelbro to do the EGE/CHE measurements. This is extremely important in the context of the Test, because Kelbro is relatively "new" to using EGE/CHE. This will once again confirm what has been said for years on this Board by those who understand - it only takes a small amount of experience to get excellent, usable Data with a 0.0001" capable Micrometer on a Case, when a Haphazard SGS provides misleading, nearly worthless info. GLOAT

Case....EGE.........CHE...........V..........M43P........Primer Pocket
1. ....0.0006"....0.0004".... 3545....54.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
2. ....0.0008"....0.0015".... 3638....58.8kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
3. ....0.0003"....0.0009".... 3530....54.2kpsi....Too Loose to reload
4. ....0.0004"....0.0008".... 3534....53.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
5. ....0.0007"....0.0012".... 3562....56.2kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
6. ....0.0023"....0.0029".... 3623....59.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
7. ....0.0010"....0.0013".... 3635....59.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
-----

So, even the most Rookie Reloader can look at the above Data and info, and realize a couple of things:
1. Shot 1, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Over Expanded". M43 info-clueless.
2. Shot 2, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Blew-out". M43 info-clueless.
3. Shot 3, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Over Expanded". M43 info-clueless.
4. Shot 4, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Over Expanded". M43 info-clueless.
5. Shot 5, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Blew-out". M43 info-clueless.
6. Shot 6, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Blew-out". M43 info-clueless.
7. Shot 7, CHE Data showed the Primer Pocket "Blew-out". M43 info-clueless.
SUPER GLOAT

I'll allow Tnekkcc and SR4759 to comment on the EGE data since they are much more familiar with it than I am.
-----

Conclusions:

1. Good old, never-fail, always-reliable, totally-repeatable, easy to learn, relatively-inexpensive, totally-accurate CHE will provide "useful Pressure Data" to even the Beginning Reloader.
2. Totally wasting HUGE amounts ($$$$.&&) of money on a Haphazard SGS, only provides misleading and mostly worthless info.
3. onefunzer's Reloading is so screwed-up that he even got the Loads mixed-up and marked a Higher Pressure Load as #2. Pitiful!
3. Had onefunz been astute enough to be measuring CHE, he would have realized he was trashing Cases with Shot #1 due to Over-Loads. And as he has been told numerous times, his Haphazard set-up M43 was totally clueless.
-----

I'll be referencing this thread in the future to show how totally worthless any Haphazard SGS is.

SUPER-DUPER GLOAT

Thanks HC - this is why I asked Kelbro the question (just above your most recent post) regarding primer pocket expansion and the corresponding M43 PSI measurements. The M43 PSI measurements are much less than would be expected for PSIs causing this much primer pocket expansion. The actual PSIs had to be 65,000 plus, and probably more like 70,000 PSI plus. I agree with you that CHE, EGE, etc are vendicated - but it makes good sense that case head expansion happens and that it should correlate with actual PSI, just like you've maintained and many of us have observed. Regards, AIU

Onefunzr, you really look BAD deleting the data. Have the BALLS to stick with the experiment and analyze the data as it is, not the way you want it to be.

I have followed all these PRE/CHE/HGSG threads, and have been very interested in them. I have not posted, because I don't have a pressure trace, and I don't do CHE/PRE. I have no actual experience to share, and have been looking for proof, not a bunch of rhetoric. I have been trying to decide, what, if any, of the methods were worth it. I have learned alot about pressure, from BOTH sides of this argument.

Now I'm just a poor country boy, but this test looks pretty definitive to me.

PRE/CHE/EGE say pressure is too high
Primer pocket expansion says pressure is too high
Velocities (to me) say pressure is too high
Quickload says pressures are too high.

HGSG says pressures are okay.

Now if it was me, and my safety we were talking about, I would assume there was a problem with either my HGSG system or the way I was running it. Maybe that's just me. But I don't think so, I think there will be alot of folks agree with me. I don't have a dog in this fight, I didn't come in with any preconcieved notions. I am strictly going off the data I am seeing, and what makes sense to me.

And I also think removing data makes a person look guilty of trying to influence results.

Plato's allegory of the cave:

The man is the effect on the brass, his shadow is the pressure measurement.

Those who take SAAMI registered pressures as reality have taken leave of their senses, the old fashioned definition of insanity.

posted on another thread by onfunzr2

>>>>
It could. But only once. That is to say, only new, never fired brass qualifies for CHE. So that disqualifies any wildcat brass that needed fireforming to chamber. At least that's what Handloader Mag editor Dave Scovill said about CHE testing his 338 Hawk\Scovill wildcat. He ended up jumping through lots of hoops to get virgin brass that would give meaningful CHE data.

Sinclair International sells lots of components and tools to those nit-picky benchrest guys. They also sell lots of 'thingys' and gadgets to make handloading more precise. Look through their catalog or website and point out to me where they offer a .0001" capable thin blade micrometer. They don't. Neither do Graf's or Midway or other vendors who cater to us reloaders. I wonder why?

You'll look far and wide to find one. And when you do it won't be 25 bucks. So that old 'CHE|PRE can be done on the cheap' is pure horse hockey! A lie told often enough eventually becomes believable. <<<<<<

Kelbro or HC, what PSI does Quick Load predict for each of the loads? Hopefully, we have enough info - that is, bullet type, weight, powder type/charge, barrel length, OAL, etc. I have QL but I'll need the above info. Regards, AIU

Another post by onefunzr2

>>>>>

quote:
Originally posted by SR4759:


#1 is just a phony excuse. What is the real reason you chose not to use a micrometer?
#2 Makes no sense. You had the money to piss away on the M43 and countless rifles.
Why not a blade mike even if you have to buy a new one?

After seeing your second post I realized you already had made up your mind and that you had an agenda.



Dude, you don't seem to be paying attention. Let me explain. Picture the scales of justice. On one pan is Ken Waters, on the other is John Barsness, Dr. Ken Oehler, Rick Jamison, Dean Grennell, Jon Sundra, Charles Petty, Jim Carmichael, Layne Simpson, Randy Brooks, and finally Ed Matunas. The overwhelming majority of ballistic experts sing the praises of the M43. It came down to who to believe. I chose to side with the latter group and bought Oehler's M43 to go along with the M35 I already owned. I don't feel I 'pissed away' my money. To the contrary, I felt it was money well spent. I hardly shoot any rounds downrange without collecting the data using Ken Oehler's fine products. I was doubly pleased that I had "got while the getting was good" when I read that Oehler Research was discontinuing all but their industrial equipment.

SR4759, what kind of buttinski are you, telling me how I should spend my money? Are you my mother??? If all you can afford is a .0001" capable mic, tough shit. If you can only afford 1 gun, tough shit. If you sit at the local watering hole swilling beer 7 days a week and can't afford M43's, thingys and a gun for every occasion, tough shit. More and more, your posts reek of jealousy. Why else would an otherwise reasonable man make such green-eyed posts? Unless he was also liquored up a might.

quote:
So SR4759, you tell me how we should set up this experiment so you have the best chance of being correct?

I gave you your chance to make suggestions. You answered by being a quitter.

You seem to think I'm some sort of magician. And will pull a rabbit out of my hat and make you look the fool. That's not what the CHE vs M43 test is all about at all. If measuring CHE via your mic is the greatest yada, yada, yada, you'll come out the winner. Perhaps both will predict the same pressure...a mexican standoff with no clear winner. Or outcome #3...the average reloading guy who uses a .0001" capable mic only once in a blue moon has the same trouble as me measuring such infinitesimally small dimensions consistently. But only one brave soul out of all the AR members stepped up to the plate. And I thank him. I didn't coerce him in any way except to ask him to post his results first. My time stamped M43 results from last Thursday are waiting. No hocus-pocus. No abracadabra. Just a head to head blind test. What could be more simple or fair?

Why you're bringing this shit up on Hotcore's phony fabricated info thread is a breach of internet etiquette. And just being an ass. Don't clog up HC's thread. Post your replies on my thread where it belongs. Unless you're too shit-faced to know the difference?


--------------
Dave
NRA Lifemember
member Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club
<<<<<<

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Kelbro or HC, what PSI does Quick Load predict for each of the loads? Hopefully, we have enough info - that is, bullet type, weight, powder type/charge, barrel length, OAL, etc. I have QL but I'll need the above info. Regards, AIU

Ran the QuickLoad program with your setup and its output was:

27.7gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets 3506fps @ 65Kpsi

26.9gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets 3429fps @ 58.8Kpsi

I had the case H2O capacity, OALs and all of that when I ran QL earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
posted on another thread by onfunzr2

>>>>
It could. But only once. That is to say, only new, never fired brass qualifies for CHE. So that disqualifies any wildcat brass that needed fireforming to chamber. At least that's what Handloader Mag editor Dave Scovill said about CHE testing his 338 Hawk\Scovill wildcat. He ended up jumping through lots of hoops to get virgin brass that would give meaningful CHE data. ...

Hey SR4759, Thank you for posting that. A recent old thread had a post about that at the top of page 3 from Turok about using "Once-Fired" Cases for CHE from Speer #12 on page 55.

Of course, I've already posted a thread where "New un-fired" Cases were used and showed where the CHE was illogical. But, reality is very difficult for some to comprehend.
-----

Anyone care to speculate just how many kpsi onefunzer's M43 is off? 8kpsi? 10kpsi? 12kpsi? Like I've said before about Haphazard SGSs(outside a Lab Environmant: A Haphazard SGS=Reloader's Pyrite(aka Fool's Gold) And for good measure, I'll also toss in

Amazing how old folks turn out to know what they are talking about when no amount of money will buy shortcuts to Pressure.

tnekkcc wrote:

quote:

Those who take SAAMI registered pressures as reality have taken leave of their senses, the old fashioned definition of insanity.

And those who take CHE/PRE as the definitive and final word on pressure, too, have lots left to learn.

CHE and PRE remain tools and nothing else -- and are no replacement for common sense, either, an area some seem to be sorely lacking in.

quote:

Originally posted by kelbro:

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Kelbro or HC, what PSI does Quick Load predict for each of the loads? Hopefully, we have enough info - that is, bullet type, weight, powder type/charge, barrel length, OAL, etc. I have QL but I'll need the above info. Regards, AIU

Ran the QuickLoad program with your setup and its output was:

27.7gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets 3506fps @ 65Kpsi

26.9gr of VV133 w/24" barrel and those bullets 3429fps @ 58.8Kpsi

I had the case H2O capacity, OALs and all of that when I ran QL earlier.

Kelbro, I'm pretty good with QL. Would you be willing to share the basic data for this experiment regarding barrel length, bullet type and weight, and caliber? - but wasn't this a 223 AI and all were loaded with VV133? Maybe I should know this from prior posts, but I'd like you to tell me. Someone I trust. Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
tnekkcc wrote:

quote:

Those who take SAAMI registered pressures as reality have taken leave of their senses, the old fashioned definition of insanity.

And those who take CHE/PRE as the definitive and final word on pressure, too, have lots left to learn.

CHE and PRE remain tools and nothing else -- and are no replacement for common sense, either, an area some seem to be sorely lacking in.

So what has pressure got to do with anything for handloaders with strong rifles?
We should be interested in the effect of pressure on the brass, not the peak pressure.
What effects the brass is not a scalar pressure, but some complex convolution of weighted area under the curve of pressure-time.
The brass itself has different yield strengths for different time durations.

What does it all mean?
Ignore pressure [you can't measure it and if you could, it's absolute value doesn't matter], and focus on the brass.
Common sense starts with defining the goal. M43 buyers got lost.

Hello AIU. I got the info off the data sheets that he had posted. It was a 223AI, 52gr SMK #1410 moly, 24" barrel and the VV133 powder. The case H2O capacity was 31.9gr and the OAL was 2.20.

Everyone please note as soon a velocity exceeded ~3515 fps things got too HOT with PSIs exceeding 65,000!! At one measured fps - 3635 fps - QL estimates a PSI of ~73,000 PSI, which is a PSI you'd expect to nearly toast a primer pocket. And, that's exactly what happened. Indeed, we'd all be better off using EGE/CHE and velocity coupled with Quick Load for estimating actual PSI. QL is also vendicated by this experiment. Regards, AIU

Cartridge: .223 Ackley Imp
Bullet: .224, 52, SierraHPBTMatchK 1410, Friction Proofed
Cartridge O.A.L. :2.260 inch = 57.40 mm
Barrel Length: 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Vihtavuori N133
Charge /Vel. /Pmax
Grains /fps / psi
2200 /2824 /30311
22.55 / 2889 /32494
23.10 /2954 /34830
23.65 /3018 /37329
24.20 /3082 /39997
24.75 /3145 /42825
25.30 /3207 /45842
25.85 /3269 /49064 ! Near Maximum !
26.40 /3329 /52506 ! Near Maximum !
26.95 /3390 /56185 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
27.50 /3449 /60122 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.05 /3507 /64337 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.60 /3565 /68855 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.15 /3622 /73702 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.70 /3679 /78910 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
30.25 /3734 /84511 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!


Cartridge: .223 Ackley Imp
Bullet : .224, 52, Sierra HPBT MatchK 1410, not friction proofed
Cartridge O.A.L. :2.260 inch = 57.40 mm
Barrel Length: 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Vihtavuori N133
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Charge /Vel. /Pmax
Grains /fps / psi
22.00 /2851 /32127
22.55 /2915 /34335
23.10 /2978 /36691
23.65 /3041 /39224
24.20 /3103 /41900
24.75 /3165 /44736
25.30 /3226 /47761 ! Near Maximum !
25.85 /3286 /50991 ! Near Maximum !
26.40 /3346 /54442 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
26.95 /3405 /58131 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
27.50 /3464 /62078 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.05 /3521 /66303 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.60 /3578 /70832 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.15 /3634 /75690 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.70 /3690 /80908 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 109 27.50 3570 1472 73213 6558 100.0 0.866 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 109 27.50 3302 1259 51073 6996 98.1 0.998 ! Near Maximum !

Cartridge: .223 Ackley Imp
Bullet : .224, 52, Sierra HPBT MatchK 1410, Friction Proofed
Cartridge O.A.L. :2.260 inch = 57.40 mm
Barrel Length: 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Vihtavuori N133
Charge /Vel. /Pmax
Grains /fps / psi
2200 /2824 /30311
22.55 / 2889 / 32494
23.10 /2954 /34830
23.65 /3018 /37329
24.20 /3082 /39997
24.75 /3145 /42825
25.30 /3207 /45842
25.85 /3269 /49064 ! Near Maximum !
26.40 /3329 /52506 ! Near Maximum !
26.95 /3390 /56185 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
27.50 /3449 /60122 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.05 /3507 /64337 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
28.60 /3565 /68855 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.15 /3622 /73702 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
29.70 /3679 /78910 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
30.25 /3734 /84511 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
...CHE and PRE remain tools and nothing else

I can see where someone who is totally unable to comprehend the results from the above Testing "might" be that delusional.

quote:

and are no replacement for common sense

Gotta agree with that statement, even if it is something where Bobby appears to be devoid.

quote:

an area some seem to be sorely lacking in.

No need to be so hard on yourself Bobby. Most of us on the Board have known for a long time you are pretty much clueless when it comes to Reloading.
-----

By the way, I've been grinding around onefunz's "claim" that Dave Skovill mentioned using "New-un-fired" Cases for some of his Testing. I did not see the article, so this is all speculation I seem to remember Skovill was doing a lot of writing about ancient-old extremely Low Pressure Cartridges, back when I was seeing his articles. I feel sure he was also writing on Higher Pressure Cartridges, but the Low Pressure stuff seemed to be his nitch back when I saw his stuff.

Perhaps(total speculation) Skovill was talking about an ancient-old Low Pressure Cartridge and he could not locate any Factory Loaded ammo to establish a PRE Benchmark Standard, but he wanted to load some up. Then he "might" have wanted the New un-fired Cases to watch for ANY Indication of Pressure. Still seems a bit strange to me, can't rely on onefunzer to give any credible input on what he was blathering about, so it is all guessing on my part. Perhaps Skovill never said it.

"I love it when a Plan comes together!" - H Smith, A-Team

BTT

Seems to me that the most ardent decrier of the SGS, Hot Core, SHOULD and would be more than willing to participate in a blind experiment that allows "one who knows how to measure pressure" to compare to the "one who uses SGS's" and compare data. Maybe this time the "one who knows how to measure" will actually participate . To this point he's only participated inasmuch as offering fear mongering and personal agenda. How many times do we have to hear about how “SGS will, if given the chance, KILL YOU AND EVERYONE YOU LOVE!” posts from this guy before he steps up? He’s done nothing more. Sadly it’s not likely he ever will either . I guess it’s safer not knowing than actually proving it. Let's not beat a especially since the Godfather of the method, Ken Waters, has stated that this method is an 'approximation only' rather than "this is the gospel truth from His Godly mouth". It is not the final say.

quote:

Originally posted by Nlife:
Seems to me that the most ardent decrier of the SGS, Hot Core, SHOULD and would be more than willing to participate in a blind experiment that allows "one who knows how to measure pressure" to compare to the "one who uses SGS's" and compare data. Maybe this time the "one who knows how to measure" will actually participate . To this point he's only participated inasmuch as offering fear mongering and personal agenda. How many times do we have to hear about how “SGS will, if given the chance, KILL YOU AND EVERYONE YOU LOVE!” posts from this guy before he steps up? He’s done nothing more. Sadly it’s not likely he ever will either . I guess it’s safer not knowing than actually proving it. Let's not beat a especially since the Godfather of the method, Ken Waters, has stated that this method is an 'approximation only' rather than "this is the gospel truth from His Godly mouth". It is not the final say.

The brass is the ultimate link in the system.
If you are trying to hit some predetermined pressure value a means of measuring that pressure would be nice to have. But it tells you little about the affect of the pressure on the brass.
It appears that kelbro's competence with a micrometer was more than adequate for this test.

quote:

Originally posted by Nlife:
Seems to me that the most ardent decrier of the SGS, Hot Core, SHOULD and would be more than willing to participate in a blind experiment that allows "one who knows how to measure pressure" to compare to the "one who uses SGS's" and compare data. ....

Hey Nlife, Looks like you are very skilled at speaking out of your clinton. Perhaps you also got hoodooed into buying a pretty much worthless Haphazard SGS, or it sounds that way.

If you had been around this Board a bit longer, you would have seen that I offered to do just as you mentioned. And when it came time to do it, another of you hoodooed fools whimped out.

Sounds as if you are related to dunceton, the owner of The World's Most Ignorant Reloading Suggestion.

Hot Core wrote:

quote:

Most of us on the Board have known for a long time you are pretty much clueless when it comes to Reloading.

Let's see...I thought you claim to be good at numbers. You say "most." That would equate to thousands of members -- after all, "most" must be more than 50 percent, right?

I challenge you to meet that criteria and prove your statement.

If you can't, then your statement qualifies as defamation of character and is subject to legal repercussions.

This board is filled with good folks who want to share information and maybe even learn a thing or two. Fortunately, antics like yours are the exception and not the rule here.

It would be nice if you raised your level of maturity so that civil conversations could take place.