quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
I challenge you to ...

Never did get an answer from you about how many kpsi Dr. Oehler said the Haphazard SGSs(those outside a Lab) are off. So, you can take your challenge and stick it up your obummer.

quote:

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

I'm shaking in my boots.

HC, if you're too hard on some of these guys, they won't post here anymore. Please go easy and let them save some face. I like having many posters. Everyone has something interesting to say. You may recall that I helped chase off Denton B. and I regret that now. Regards, AIU

Hot Core-

This has nothing to do with Dr. Oehler. It's all about you, your endless ego and the third-grade bully tactics you resort to when you have nothing to contribute to the discussion.

Many good, knowledgeable folks have stopped posting on the reloading forum due to your antics.

Is it jealousy of Dr. Oehler that brings out this behavior? And your good buddy tnekkcc made such rude and mindless comments regarding Dr. Oehler that the site owner -- who almost NEVER gets involved -- had to step in and put an end to it.

It's pitiful.

Grow up.

You treat this forum as though you are the teacher and everyone else is your illiterate pupil. I have news for you: NO ONE has to answer to you. And from what I can ascertain, many of the folks are a hell of a lot more intelligent than you are.

And THAT'S what really burns your toast.

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
from what I can ascertain, many of the folks are a hell of a lot more intelligent than you are. ...

Hey Bobby, I can agree with that. Of course you are certainly not one of them.
-----

Hey AIU, I understand and enjoy laughing at them too. I do not respond well when idiots begin tossing mud, always feel like slinging a bit more back to them.

New Year's bump...

kelbro, please tell me what all the abrieviations stand for. It's all a bit over my head.

Notice how Onefunzr2 disappeared from this forum?

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
kelbro, please tell me what all the abrieviations stand for. It's all a bit over my head.

CHE = Case Head Expansion
PRE = Pressure Ring Expansion
EGE = Extractor Groove Expansion
VEL = Velocity
PSI = Pressure measurement (pounds/square inch)

Hope those are the ones that you needed.

Yes thank you.....but still over my head....you can't fix that though.

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
Yes thank you.....but still over my head....you can't fix that though.

Pretty simple theory in fact. You use a factory load as a reference. Take your measurements with good instruments. Compare your loads as you work up to the factory load reference.

PM HotCore and he will send you his writeup on the method which explains it in more detail.

It may not be 100% but I feel that it's a doggone good tool to have in your arsenal. So many of the other so-called pressure indicators may not identify an overpressure situation until you have greatly exceeded the recommended levels.

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.

I would be more than happy to engage in such a test with Hot Core. However he will come back with his usual garbage and decline. By declining it is obvious he knows the limitations of CHE. What else can be said?

However, should he wish to partake in a test I am always open to it. I would suggest the '06 or .308W but am open to other cartridges. An easy yet excellent test would be to for Hot Core to take 20 cases of the same lot as per his CHE instructions and take his measurements. He could then send them to me and I would shoot 4 different loads using 5 each of the cases (readily marked and identified asa test lot) for the loads. I would have the psi measurments via a M43 PBL. I would then send the cases back to Hot Core for his CHE measurements. We would both then send our findings to a third party who would then publish them here. Since neither Hot Core nor I would have access to each others findings nothing could be skewed.

Simple enough and unbiased.

Larry Gibson

Sounds like the test that OnefunZR and I did... It was a completely blind test. No way to skew anything. I sent him the results and posted them, as measured. He posted his Oehler printouts. Then he came back on here and deleted his posts. Fortunately, a couple of us logged his data.

Mo' data is always better! I would offer to shoot and do the measurements for you but getting jerked around once was enough for me.

Hopefully, HC will take you up on your offer.

Nothing was "Biased" in the excellent Test that onefunz and Kelbro ran. Only problem larry and onefunz have/had with it is it showed EXACTLY what I've said from day one - A non-calibrated Haphazard SGS = Reloaders Pyrite(aka Fool's Gold)

GLOAT

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Nothing was "Biased" in the excellent Test that onefunz and Kelbro ran. Only problem larry and onefunz have/had with it is it showed EXACTLY what I've said from day one - A non-calibrated Haphazard SGS = Reloaders Pyrite(aka Fool's Gold)

GLOAT

Not hardly, the data does not show that and we've been through this before. The world is not flat, you need to move on into the 21st century.

Larry Gibson

Since I don't see Larrys ignored posts, let me take a guess. The test was not done correctly(only Larry knows how to do it right) he probably has access to a pressure gun so he can calibrate some factory ammo, better put that strain gauge on the pressure gun then Larry. Or maybe he has some special lot of factory ammo mthat he knows the exact pressure in his whatever rifle(impossible) but he'll find some kool aid drinkers to hang on his every word.
So how am I doing so far?

quote:

Originally posted by swheeler:
...how am I doing so far?

You did yourself proud. Can you do that with the Lottery?

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by swheeler:
...how am I doing so far?

You did yourself proud. Can you do that with the Lottery?

I wish I could!

quote:

Originally posted by swheeler:
Since I don't see Larrys ignored posts, let me take a guess. The test was not done correctly(only Larry knows how to do it right) he probably has access to a pressure gun so he can calibrate some factory ammo, better put that strain gauge on the pressure gun then Larry. Or maybe he has some special lot of factory ammo mthat he knows the exact pressure in his whatever rifle(impossible) but he'll find some kool aid drinkers to hang on his every word.
So how am I doing so far?

swheeler

As usual, not very well. Yes I do do it right as I follow the instructions and am careful about the set up. I also test the M43 on every set up by using the same lot of ammo in the same rifle (that's using "reference ammo" correctly and checks on the "calibration" of the M43) as a reference and see that all is well with the set up.

It is very obvious that something was awry with kelbro's set up. The 41K psi he obtained with Federal factory ammo was the clue. He observed the clue but failed to pay heed to it. Thus the rest of the data was flawed. The way below normal psi he obtained with the Federal factory ammo was obviously carried through with the loads tested. He should have noticed that if he was experienced with the M43. I have been through this on another forum with you and explained it there.

It would be nice if Kelbro would give us the information on the rifle used in the test with the M43 he used. Also how far ahead of the bolt face was the strain gauge attached to the barrel? I am not criticising kelbro here as he may just not have known something was wrong. I will gladly discus it with him via PM if he will PM me.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
It is very obvious that something was awry with kelbro's set up. The 41K psi he obtained with Federal factory ammo was the clue. ...

Hey SWheeler, Talk about totally, completely 100% Clueless - larry can't even read the thread and understand who had the totally worthless(outside a Lab) M43.

I would comment a bit more, but I was just "bragging" about going 8-days without telling the Fools that they are indeed Fools.

Well, once more, what started as a pretty good thread was trashed by Hot Core and his desire to impress us with his wisdom by trashing everyone else. Can someone explain to me how the "ignore" feature works? (I don't mind asking for help when I need it.) Hot Core seeing as you are so obviously superior to everyone else, and being aware that your pearls of wisdom are just pearls among swine, why don't you take your pearls somewhere (else) where they will appreciate them?
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:

It is very obvious that something was awry with kelbro's set up. The 41K psi he obtained with Federal factory ammo was the clue. He observed the clue but failed to pay heed to it. Thus the rest of the data was flawed. The way below normal psi he obtained with the Federal factory ammo was obviously carried through with the loads tested. He should have noticed that if he was experienced with the M43. I have been through this on another forum with you and explained it there.

It would be nice if Kelbro would give us the information on the rifle used in the test with the M43 he used. Also how far ahead of the bolt face was the strain gauge attached to the barrel? I am not criticising kelbro here as he may just not have known something was wrong. I will gladly discus it with him via PM if he will PM me.

Larry Gibson

kelbro didn't use the HSGS system, onefunzr was the one with the system. I only took measurements. But you make an excellent point Larry. If any one part of the system is not hooked up properly, the results could be disastrous. Imagine a 50K load that was only displaying 41K and a guy kept 'working up'....

Spending a lot of money on any system does not make one a ballistician.

I could plug in an EKG and follow the instructions on how to hook it up. I could read and interpret the results according to the book. Would you then go get a triple-bypass based on my recommendations?

To clarify, my comments on competency were not directed towards Larry.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
Hot Core seeing as you are so obviously superior to everyone else, and being aware that your pearls of wisdom are just pearls among swine, why don't you take your pearls somewhere (else) where they will appreciate them?
Peter.

Why don't you take your advice and stick it up your obummer.

If you are too stupid to use the Ignore Feature, just look to the left column and when you see "Hot Core" just go right on by - you idiot.

Thanks Hot Core that is about what I expected.
Peter.

My apologies to kelbro, it indeed was not he that did the actual testing with a M43. It was "onefunzr" and he has deleted his part of the thread. That is too bad. However it appears onefunzr was using a M700 Remington. If so then at the very best he was measuring the pressure ove the shoulder/neck area of the chamber. The strain gauge is supposed to be over the center of the cahmber to accurately measure chamber pressure. The resulting low readings he obtained are probably correct for that area he was measuring. Thus the data presented had little correlation to each other with regards to comparison of with CHE whith chamber pressure. Perhaps that is why onefunzr pulled his posts; he discovered he had errored in the set up.

However, if we take the 41K psi the Federal was measured at and use it as "reference ammuntion" we can see there is about 9-14k difference between what was recorded and what should or could have been assuming the Federal factory ammunition was loaded to SAAMI standard. Thus the 9-14k additional psi becomes the "offset" as the industry calls it of the misnomer "calibration" that Hot Core gives it. Then using the chart and figures that Hot core used with the offset we find;

Case....EGE.........CHE...........V..........M43P........Primer Pocket
1. ....0.0006"....0.0004".... 3545....68.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
2. ....0.0008"....0.0015".... 3638....74.8kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
3. ....0.0003"....0.0009".... 3530....68.2kpsi....Too Loose to reload
4. ....0.0004"....0.0008".... 3534....66.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
5. ....0.0007"....0.0012".... 3562....68.2kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
6. ....0.0023"....0.0029".... 3623....72.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
7. ....0.0010"....0.0013".... 3635....72.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations

With the new corrected psi figures using the offset the M43 psi figures are completely in line with the case condition. A proper set up would probably have shown figures close to those calculations. Obviously Hot Core is going to vehemiantly disagree as he always does. The problem is the figures are his, I just corrected them by properly using the data available. He will complain simply because it does not agree with his out dated opinions, he really should come into the 21st century as I previously stated.

I would be more than happy to redo the test with one caveat; I will not load to the point of blowing primers. I will however load to the 65K psi per the M43. If CHE can't keep us and our rifles safe within that psi then what value is it. I can accurately measure chamber pressure in .223 and numerous other cartridges if someone is willing partake. They can measure the case heads of 15 different cases (I can supply them if necessary) to have 3 each of 5 different loads (better to get a minimal "average" CHE measurement) and mail them to me. I can then fire them with 5 different loads and mail them back for remeasurement of CHE. We can then post the data or a 3rd party can. Anyone interested?

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
Thanks Hot Core that is about what I expected.
Peter.

You smart mouthed me on the RimFire Board and I responded. Then I erased it and Thanked You for goading me into calling YANKEE Land again.

I figure you are a worthless Carpetbagger and a Freedom Freeloader(never served). So, if you want to swap insults, I can do it.
-----

Everyone needs to realize larry had ZERO to do with the totally unbiased Test and has now screwed-up the actual M43 info to fit his agenda.

All the M43 PRESSURE info below is totally BOGUS BOLOGNA:

Case....EGE.........CHE...........V..........M43P........Primer Pocket
1. ....0.0006"....0.0004".... 3545....68.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
2. ....0.0008"....0.0015".... 3638....74.8kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
3. ....0.0003"....0.0009".... 3530....68.2kpsi....Too Loose to reload
4. ....0.0004"....0.0008".... 3534....66.7kpsi....Too Loose to reload
5. ....0.0007"....0.0012".... 3562....68.2kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
6. ....0.0023"....0.0029".... 3623....72.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations
7. ....0.0010"....0.0013".... 3635....72.0kpsi....Blown well beyond normal Pressure Limitations

BOGUS info is how denton makes his points, and it appears larry is following in his footsteps.

Pitiful!

Don't want to take part in a test done correctly? At least Hot core is consitent in his poor style of remarks/responses as that's the best he can come up with when someone throws facts into his BS.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
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.

Common sense starts with defining the goal.

I think his post says it all regards practical handloading.

My primary goals are to:

- Have my handloaded ammo cycle correctly trhrough the firearm in which it is used.

- Have loads where the brass lasts for at least 8 reloads each with no signs of incipient failure.

- Obtain velocities satisfactory to propel a bullet I find works well, at a velocity adequate to produce a trajectory and accuracy I can apply usefully in hunting or target competition.

- Produce velocities and trajectories which are consistent (within 40 fps extreme spread over 10 consecutive shots).

- Use components which are common ones, easily obtained from several suppliers.

If I get all that, I have never felt the need in 65+ years of shooting to know, or even guess what the pressure levels are.

My hobby is shooting, not amateur gas flow and pressure-vessel engineering.

Y'all have fun debating esoterica. I gotta go do some relaxing loading......

I think this test was crippled from the very start by the use of the .223 AI cartridge.
Using this round eliminated using factory loads for comparison to the data from both the M43 and the micrometer.

SR4759; Be sure and take the pills the nice Doctor gave you, and don't forget tp put the
metal foil in your hat.

Hawk, hawk pituey.
You are late to the show.
Care to explain yourself?

Just to put things in a hunter's perspective, I suggest good reading on this subject is found in two articles by Bob Hagel in the Wolfe publication "Big Bore Rifles & Cartridges".

The two articles in mind are his coverage on the history of, and his load developing experiences with, the .338x9.3x74R (one of Elmer Keith's favourites), and the .340 Weatherby cartridges.

How he determined maximum and working loads, and how his approach worked out for him, are very interesting to me, and very practical.

Best of all, his explanation of his approach is crystal clear and easy for anyone to understand.

quote:

Originally posted by kelbro:

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,

quote:

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 .

The simple answer is: No!

The reason you can load more powder is the fact that an AI case has more cubic capacity, it can burn more powder safely, albeit at the same peak pressure.
The brass is no stronger than the parent case, in fact if done wrong, the AI procedure can weaken the brass!