Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 12-01-2018, 06:06 AM
saskbooknut saskbooknut is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,592
Default

CUP - copper units of pressure have been superseded by strain gauge data for many years.
Anything listing CUP is using obsolete technology.
Using strain gauge data is how they discovered that max load data is operating at significantly higher pressure than previously thought.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-01-2018, 08:16 AM
silver silver is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Maidstone Sask
Posts: 2,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
Besides, it's Hodgdon's most recent data that appears to be off.
.
I have been following this thread closely. Your experience with it and others experience and the Speer manual doesn't match my experience and the experience of some of the posters here. I have gone all the way up to 14 grains and not seen pressure signs.

It is easy to conclude that we have different batches of Lil Gun. I wouldn't throw it out, just stick to the lower powder charges. After all, you have 700 more rounds in that pound of powder. When you buy a new pound to replace it, maybe they will have stabilised their formula by then.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-01-2018, 08:56 AM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by silver View Post
I have been following this thread closely. Your experience with it and others experience and the Speer manual doesn't match my experience and the experience of some of the posters here. I have gone all the way up to 14 grains and not seen pressure signs.

It is easy to conclude that we have different batches of Lil Gun. I wouldn't throw it out, just stick to the lower powder charges. After all, you have 700 more rounds in that pound of powder. When you buy a new pound to replace it, maybe they will have stabilised their formula by then.

I think I may also have a rifle with a tight chamber or tight bore or both.

It is one of the early production model 43 218 Bee Winchesters. As I understand it, it was bought new, by my uncle, around 1952

I believe the factory rounds were developed to work in the model 65 which would have required significantly lower pressures if I understand it right.
Yet factory rounds, bought in the 1970s showed signs of high pressure.
As in moderately flattened primers, and noticeable signs of some case stretching above the base.

Recently purchased rounds show a bit more signs of high pressure.
Nothing alarming, until I had the case separation and hard bolt lift the other day.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-01-2018, 10:20 AM
Dean2's Avatar
Dean2 Dean2 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Near Edmonton
Posts: 14,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
I think I may also have a rifle with a tight chamber or tight bore or both.

It is one of the early production model 43 218 Bee Winchesters. As I understand it, it was bought new, by my uncle, around 1952

I believe the factory rounds were developed to work in the model 65 which would have required significantly lower pressures if I understand it right.
Yet factory rounds, bought in the 1970s showed signs of high pressure.
As in moderately flattened primers, and noticeable signs of some case stretching above the base.

Recently purchased rounds show a bit more signs of high pressure.
Nothing alarming, until I had the case separation and hard bolt lift the other day.
If 9.5 grains of LG is showing pressure signs, and so is factory ammo, I would strongly suggest you take that gun into a smith and get him to give it a good look over. There has to be something wrong with the gun to be showing high pressure at such low load levels. My first suspicion would be headspace but it could be a combination of many things.

Factory 22 Bee ammo is truly anemic. Even top hand loads are low enough pressure you can use pistol primers with no issues. There is clearly something amiss with you gun. Let us know the outcome if you have it looked at. Best of luck.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-01-2018, 12:42 PM
32-40win 32-40win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Drumheller
Posts: 6,733
Default

The part about the separation and hard bolt lift is a bit spooky, although I'm also wondering about the level of primer flattening you are observing, and how old that brass was. Primer flattening isn't always a pressure sign. On a rimmed cartridge a slightly flattened primer isn't all that uncommon due to rim thickness and chamber cutout variances, no different than a belted case in that respect. Wondering if it isn't maybe just a brass issue on an old case caused by die settings as well. You say the separated case was a reload,, was it an old one?, were other questionable loads on old cases or some of the once fired you had?
FYI: Speer was one of the manuals that used case measurements, Ed Matunas wrote some of those older books and he later admitted in an article, that they had not used a CUP tool on some stuff in there, just extrapolated it to CUP. Although, you'd think a listing with L'il gun should have been tested with the newer methods, seems somewhat odd it would show CUP, L'il Gun isn't that all that old of a powder.
__________________
You should also be a member;
CCFR
CSSA
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-01-2018, 04:07 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 32-40win View Post
The part about the separation and hard bolt lift is a bit spooky, although I'm also wondering about the level of primer flattening you are observing, and how old that brass was. Primer flattening isn't always a pressure sign. On a rimmed cartridge a slightly flattened primer isn't all that uncommon due to rim thickness and chamber cutout variances, no different than a belted case in that respect. Wondering if it isn't maybe just a brass issue on an old case caused by die settings as well. You say the separated case was a reload,, was it an old one?, were other questionable loads on old cases or some of the once fired you had?
FYI: Speer was one of the manuals that used case measurements, Ed Matunas wrote some of those older books and he later admitted in an article, that they had not used a CUP tool on some stuff in there, just extrapolated it to CUP. Although, you'd think a listing with L'il gun should have been tested with the newer methods, seems somewhat odd it would show CUP, L'il Gun isn't that all that old of a powder.
So how does hard bolt lift equate to old brass?

As for the age of that brass, I do have brass from as far back as the 1970s but most is much more recent. The most recent was bought as factory ammo around 2004.
The case that separated and the one that showed excessive primer flattening both came from the 2004 brass.

My records show that a total of five exhibited hard bolt lift and excessively flattened primers. All were loaded with data from Hodgdon's website.

Using data from the Speer manual, I have had no issues with this rifle. Whether using factory loads or reloads I loaded myself.

I haven't shot this rifle a lot, maybe 200 rounds of my hand-loads and around fifty factory loads.

All that aside, it is not the rifle I'm concerned about. It's the discrepancy between Hodgdon's online date and other data sources including Hodgdon's own reloading manual.

I expect to find some changes in data as time passes, but to go from what was a max load to now listing that as a starting load, which is the case here, seems more then just normal advancements in technology or differences between powder batches.


Especially when one considers that Sierra's most recent data for that rifle lists a max load that is very close to Hodgdon's starting load.


Honestly, I suspect Hodgdon tested their loads on a very recent custom rifle but failed to include warnings that this data may not be safe in older, off the shelf rifles.

If my suspicions are correct, then Lil'Gun may not be an appropriate powder for this rifle under any circumstances.

I'd be interested in finding out how many of those who say they are having no issues with much higher charges of Lil'Gun in their handloads, are shooting older factory chambered rifles like mine. And how many are shooting a Model 43 or a 65
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw

Last edited by KegRiver; 12-01-2018 at 04:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-01-2018, 09:17 PM
32-40win 32-40win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Drumheller
Posts: 6,733
Default

Separation is usually from case stretching or even perhaps old improperly made cases, and also pushing the shoulder back a bit far with the sizing die, and from losing springback in the material. If the material won't release from the chamber wall, the base web area stretches because there is nowhere else that can move, and the primer backs out before the base moves, then the base goes back and pushes the primer back in. It may chamber fine with a sized case, but not release as it has no springback left. Which also makes a sticky lift. And it doesn't take overpressure to do that. Although, you likely possibly ought to have been seeing split necks before that, or when sizing them. Brass ages and loses springback also, even new unfired brass, usually takes more like 50 yrs plus though, as far as I know.. It would seem that it shouldn't happen on 2004 brass, but, it is within the realm of possibility, on an odd mixture of material, or improper heating sequences, when the brass was made. If it did that with new once fired cases, or factory loads, then it is either the gun or the powder. Check the old cases you have with a paper clip, should be able to feel stretch/separation grooves above the base before you see them as a ring.
Stranger things have happened than getting a fast lot of powder, it happens, been there, done that. The manuals are done with a lot of rounds fired and tested these days, and they publish it with a mean average pressure rating, so, it can be a combination of things that occur. But it isn't often that it is the powder or the manual being the issue. Manuals can have misprints, too. They usually catch those PDQ.
I'm looking at data for my 7-08 today, old manual shows 49.0 gr as a max load, new one says 46, been shooting that gun with 48gr for 30 yrs, same case, powder and bullet, but with a magnum primer, not a standard one as per the manual. And another bullet mfgr which usually shows smaller charges due to being monometal bullets, shows the 49gr charge. I understand your skepticism.
__________________
You should also be a member;
CCFR
CSSA
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-02-2018, 12:45 AM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 32-40win View Post
Separation is usually from case stretching or even perhaps old improperly made cases, and also pushing the shoulder back a bit far with the sizing die, and from losing springback in the material. If the material won't release from the chamber wall, the base web area stretches because there is nowhere else that can move, and the primer backs out before the base moves, then the base goes back and pushes the primer back in. It may chamber fine with a sized case, but not release as it has no springback left. Which also makes a sticky lift. And it doesn't take overpressure to do that. Although, you likely possibly ought to have been seeing split necks before that, or when sizing them. Brass ages and loses springback also, even new unfired brass, usually takes more like 50 yrs plus though, as far as I know.. It would seem that it shouldn't happen on 2004 brass, but, it is within the realm of possibility, on an odd mixture of material, or improper heating sequences, when the brass was made. If it did that with new once fired cases, or factory loads, then it is either the gun or the powder. Check the old cases you have with a paper clip, should be able to feel stretch/separation grooves above the base before you see them as a ring.
Stranger things have happened than getting a fast lot of powder, it happens, been there, done that. The manuals are done with a lot of rounds fired and tested these days, and they publish it with a mean average pressure rating, so, it can be a combination of things that occur. But it isn't often that it is the powder or the manual being the issue. Manuals can have misprints, too. They usually catch those PDQ.
I'm looking at data for my 7-08 today, old manual shows 49.0 gr as a max load, new one says 46, been shooting that gun with 48gr for 30 yrs, same case, powder and bullet, but with a magnum primer, not a standard one as per the manual. And another bullet mfgr which usually shows smaller charges due to being monometal bullets, shows the 49gr charge. I understand your skepticism.

So you don't think that the severely flattened primers had anything to do with over-pressure?

And what about the fact that Hodgdon;s online data show starting loads that are listed as max loads in Sierra's loading data?


BTW, for those who think the new data was developed with electronic measuring equipment. And is therefore more reliable.

It seems that may not be the case. I see today that the pressures listed by Hodgdon in their online data, is in CUP units, not the newer PSI measure.

I hadn't noticed before because I was more interested in starting loads and velocities. And because pressure data is pretty meaningless without pressure tolerances for the rifle, which is information I don't have.

I also found online where others have been puzzled by the apparent discrepancies between Hodgdon's data and other sources and it looks like they got the same responses to their inquiry that I am getting.

It seems no one has the answer and Hodgdon is not saying.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-02-2018, 09:17 AM
silver silver is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Maidstone Sask
Posts: 2,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post

I'd be interested in finding out how many of those who say they are having no issues with much higher charges of Lil'Gun in their handloads, are shooting older factory chambered rifles like mine. And how many are shooting a Model 43 or a 65
My 218 is a Cooper model 38 that I believe was made in the last 5 or 10 years. I got it about 3 years ago from a friend.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-02-2018, 10:53 AM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by silver View Post
My 218 is a Cooper model 38 that I believe was made in the last 5 or 10 years. I got it about 3 years ago from a friend.
I would love to have a 218 that new. I like the round. It's deadly on Coyote out past 200 yards. Which is pretty much my limit with any cartridge. LOL

I don't know how accurate the serial number information for my rifle is.
According to what I found, my rifle was manufactured in the first year that the Model 43 was chambered in 218

Other information I found says that the rifle was greatly improved later in the production run, around serial number 16,500 I believe. Mine is serial number 2368 if I recall rightly. Serial numbers 1 through 6525 were produced in 1948
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 12-03-2018, 12:57 PM
silver silver is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Maidstone Sask
Posts: 2,793
Default

I have been playing around on my computer today and in 2003 Hodgdon had a recall on Lil Gun powder lot number 103080221. The lot number should be on an orange tag on the bottom of the can.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:16 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by silver View Post
I have been playing around on my computer today and in 2003 Hodgdon had a recall on Lil Gun powder lot number 103080221. The lot number should be on an orange tag on the bottom of the can.

I think that is about the time I bought my LilGun but I don't think my lot number is a match.

The number seems to be partially covered with an after production sticker but I can read 10309410

And it's on the side of the label, there is no orange sticker anywhere.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:19 PM
silver silver is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Maidstone Sask
Posts: 2,793
Default

I think you will be OK, I just thought I would put it up here just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-21-2019, 01:54 PM
32-40win 32-40win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Drumheller
Posts: 6,733
Default

Well Keg, you may well be right in that their data is a bit hot, maybe even a lot hot for some guns. I loaded up 5 ea with 40gr Vmax and the Li'l Gun I bought for it, sometime around 5-6 yrs ago. Looking all through all the date I could find, decided on 13.0gr to start with. Supposed to be about 3100 with a max load at 14.5. Used a Magnetospeed V3 to do these. Stevens 044-1/2 w/ 24" RKS on it. All partial FLS'd.
First shot @ 13.0 was 3252, no apparent pressure signs, all 5 were fine, and holding nice in the 3225 to 3250 range. next was 13.2, clocked 3328,3337, 3370, round cornered primers, but, flattened a hair, then I went to 13.5, 3390, 3391,3409 and 3424, and got some really flat primers, right to the edges. Didn't bother with any more shots on the heavier charges. Bees are not supposed to go quite that fast. That was indoors, about 60-65deg. So, ya, I'd rate that powder as faster than advertised and shown in their data. The 13.0gr load was fine on what I checked, I haven't checked the base expansion or primer pockets yet on the 13.5 loads.

Also ran some AA1680, which is a new purchase, a couple of months ago, their data was pretty much bang on, same bullet, 40gr Vmax, ran 14.0 to 14.7gr, got 2805 to 2840 and zero pressure indicators.

As to the case separations you had, it could be your brass, it could be the gun, I'd be checking out the gun with a different powder like 1680 and the brass , before loading it, with a paperclip for signs of internal stretch rings starting.
__________________
You should also be a member;
CCFR
CSSA
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-24-2019, 06:40 PM
aardvaark aardvaark is offline
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Lacombe, AB
Posts: 482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogslayer403 View Post
I had simular issues with lilgun in my 17 hornet blowing primers at starting loads swithched to h110 no issues so far
I can ditto this post. Ruined a bunch of brass bc the only place that pressure signs showed up was the primer pockets stretched badly. Ended up going with with CFE-BLK. And that’s worked out very well. And I found out as well that the lilgun powder is very temp sensitive as well. So keep that in mind too.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-25-2019, 07:48 AM
Pioneer2 Pioneer2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,336
Default Ken Waters Pet Loads

Manual cautions handloaders to stay well below MAX loads in the Win 43 and 65 rifles.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-25-2019, 09:51 AM
ken1989 ken1989 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Posts: 236
Default

Win 43's hornets require .223" diameter bullets. I suspect this is the case for the 218 Bees as well. This is likely the cause for your higher pressures.

Last edited by ken1989; 01-25-2019 at 10:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-25-2019, 10:23 AM
Pioneer2 Pioneer2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,336
Default yes

They do.Early Hornets drove me nuts as well.Might be worth while to get Lee to make you a custom .223 size sizer to use on the readily available .224 projectiles? Could be worse could be a .22Jet .222 groove.

Last edited by Pioneer2; 01-25-2019 at 10:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-25-2019, 05:47 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken1989 View Post
Win 43's hornets require .223" diameter bullets. I suspect this is the case for the 218 Bees as well. This is likely the cause for your higher pressures.
Yes, most 22 hornets and 218 bee's and many other similar small cartridges manufactured up until WW2 were made with .223 diameter barrels. That could easily explain the pressure excursions. Speer and others used to make bullets specifically for these undersized bores and didn't recommend using .224" bullets in them. In fact Hornady made a bullet called the 40 grain Jet specifically for those old rifles but even smaller @ .222" diameter.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-25-2019, 11:35 PM
Pioneer2 Pioneer2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,336
Default Sierra

Made .223 projectiles in 40 + 45gr
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-14-2019, 11:07 AM
silver silver is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Maidstone Sask
Posts: 2,793
Default

Keg, I'm still thinking about this one. I think the last few posts about a 223 barrel may be on to some thing. I would find a nice pile of snow and fire a few shots into it. Come spring and when the snow melts, go look for the bullets. Measure them up and get your barrel diameter.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-14-2019, 02:20 PM
32-40win 32-40win is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Near Drumheller
Posts: 6,733
Default

If you know someone who casts .22 bullets, it's easy enough to slug the barrel. may be able to accomplish that test by using a pulled .22lr bullet. Certainly worth checking out.
__________________
You should also be a member;
CCFR
CSSA
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.