|
|
Post by edge on Apr 10, 2012 18:16:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Apr 11, 2012 16:57:13 GMT -5
AWESOME! Thanks TG for all your hard work and expense. And thanks to Edge for setting this up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 7:14:40 GMT -5
thanks guys, thats a bunch of work and a lot of powder burned...
|
|
|
|
Post by edge on Apr 12, 2012 8:00:16 GMT -5
I will reply, first this is all TGinPA, edge did nothing but put up the links but thanks for the thoughts  Second I think that we ALL send our thanks to TGinPA for his range work, expense of the work and for all of the time it took him to post this information.Third, now we should keep this thread strictly for PT discussion. Thanks. edge. |
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Apr 12, 2012 14:03:41 GMT -5
I will start things off. Looking at trace 21c 78 grains of H322 with a 300 grain bullet coming in at right around 45K in a PACNOR .45. I think this is a dynamite load and plan on trying an extrapalated version of this load which would be N110/H322 - 15/60 grains respectively. Knowing what we know about duplexing I am anticipating around 44K and 2600 fps using the above mentioned trace as a guide shooting full formed bullets sabotless with 300 grain bullets.
I am well aware I will be venturing above the 40K theme here but when you go with the heavier bullets for some that is what it will take. I feel staying under 45K is perfectly safe and I anticipate managble recoil.
What I would love to know is TGinPA or edge or anyone for that matter do you think I will get a good full powder burn using this load and do you see any issues with it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Apr 12, 2012 14:16:35 GMT -5
I am getting 2575fps @ 10/58, 10/60 bumps it to 2700fps. N110/H322-300 SW.
|
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Apr 12, 2012 18:33:49 GMT -5
Onecardchuck:
If your barrel is >23in (BP tip to Muzzle), my reading of QL suggests that almost all the powder should be consumed with the 110/322 15/60gr duplex behind a 300gr bullet. The 15/60 duplex is a load, which IMO, may be close to 50kpsi. If I am wrong and others chime in and disagree, it wouldn’t be the first (or last) time. If I trace the 10/60 load you could go from there?? JMO. Wondering if there is a specific velocity level with this bullet weight you are trying to achieve??
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Apr 13, 2012 7:43:14 GMT -5
TGinPA and DaveW,
I have a 25 inch barrel so I am 23 inches BP tip to end of barrel. I was looking for no more than 2500 to 2700 fps and will probably fall back to the 10/60 range to start with on information provided from the both of you.
TGinPA if you can add the 10/60 to the list I would be very inrested in it's results and would greatly appreciate it. I find this duplex combination to be very clean burning, reliable, and accurate with the little testing I have done with it so far. If I really feel I need the 15 of N110 to get better objuration I will start with 15/55 and go from there.
Your input is very much appreciated gentleman and look forward to your future findings.
|
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Apr 13, 2012 10:41:52 GMT -5
Onecardchuck:
PM sent.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by muznut on Apr 16, 2012 10:11:03 GMT -5
TG I like your 54c trace 5/60 red dot/I4895 but I was wondering if it would be safe to use H4895 in place of the I4895 I know the burn charts show the H a little faster but that's what I have? And thanks for all your hard work with these loads and traces. Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Apr 16, 2012 18:49:51 GMT -5
Onecardchuck: If your barrel is >23in (BP tip to Muzzle), my reading of QL suggests that almost all the powder should be consumed with the 110/322 15/60gr duplex behind a 300gr bullet. The 15/60 duplex is a load, which IMO, may be close to 50kpsi. If I am wrong and others chime in and disagree, it wouldn’t be the first (or last) time. If I trace the 10/60 load you could go from there?? JMO. Wondering if there is a specific velocity level with this bullet weight you are trying to achieve?? TG Good call! Thought the 10/60 might end up around 50kpsi. |
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Apr 17, 2012 9:58:11 GMT -5
Dave W,
Sent you a PM.
|
|
|
|
Post by navydad55 on Jun 20, 2012 0:14:41 GMT -5
Instead of trying to kill an elephant, I want to kill a can at 100 yards and under. I want to use smokeless powder not a reduced charge of BP. Think of this as a "fun" load for some one new to muzzle loading. Does anyone have such a load that they use. Bullet weight is not an issue.
In looking at the pressure curves my first thought was: What is the top pressure for the Savage ML II? Most of the loads listed were in the 30-35K psi range although I see 50K in places. As you can tell by my question I am not hunting a maximum load, just a fun one.
|
|
|
|
Post by ET on Jun 20, 2012 7:16:48 GMT -5
Edge
I whole heartily agree. There is a lot of work, time and expense involved in compiling this data that benefits many others. Even I have benefited from our brief discussions with TG concerning the operation of the PT Unit.
Navydad55
The 10ML-II bore is designed to handle approx. 90k pressure (yield strength).
Some of us feel that a safer zone of pressure usage would be under 40K to allow for human error. But the bottom line is that an individual shooter must decide what is a safe zone for him/her.
In order to get the best accuracy there are some intricacies the shooter needs to know about smokeless muzzle loading that is often referred to as the Learning Curve. Once a good understanding is established the fun really begins. What would benefit a newcomer is if a shooter with experience with the 10ML-II could spend some time with you going through known factors for good performance. This would really shorten the learning curve.
You might be thinking, what possible factors are there to consider?
- bore roughness
- front scope mount screw bottoming on barrel
- fore-stock making contact with the barrel
- torque of stock hold down screws
- bore heat affecting sabots
- trimming and indexing sabots
- vent liner orifice size
- maintenance of BP and vent
I’ve probably missed a few and hope this mention of some factors doesn’t discourage you. Once these factors are understood it’s a new ball game in producing more accurate loads.
As to finding a good load I suggest looking into the board section titled “LOAD INFO” that can direct you to what you may want to try. It’s a good starting point.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Dec 5, 2012 17:20:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Dec 5, 2012 20:22:41 GMT -5
Onecard............FWIW, yesterday I shot 15/55 of 4759/322 with a 300 gr. XTP and it produced 2520 fps. I have found substituting 4759 and N-110 to give very similar results. I tried researching my files for the load you were questioning but could not find where I went that high (powder charge) with any 300 gr. bullets...............200 and 225's....yes!
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by onecardchuck on Dec 5, 2012 23:43:10 GMT -5
Richard,
Thank you for the update that coincides with what I was getting with the 15/55 N110/H322 and I agree 4759 does give very similar results to N110. I have not yet tried the 10/60 wanted to start off a little lower and work my way up I still have a few more things to try with this load before I start changing the load.
Hope all is well on you end,
|
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Dec 6, 2012 9:51:40 GMT -5
DaveW: PM sent.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Dec 30, 2012 10:36:45 GMT -5
TG, I see the pressure and velocity are higher @ 38* for the 12/50 N110/H4198 load with the 275 MH & BE than they were when you traced this load a few months ago @ 59&77*.
Any differences, lot numbers, chrony, etc.?
|
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Dec 31, 2012 15:17:06 GMT -5
DaveW: If I read your questions correctly, IMO, the early and later 12/50 275mh values seem ok. Agree that the 12/50 275be diffs btw the 9/13 value and the 12/27 values for the 275be don’t make sense. Regarding the 9/13 275be values, RB once stated “well, things don’t always go perfect at the range” (I use this quote frequently for times like this) and that was from a guy who knew some things about this stuff. So, when I have a moment, I will do that load again (best out of 3, sort of). BTW, the T =59 on one 9/13 275be reading should be T=77 Thanks for your interest. Best wishes to all for the New Year.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Mar 9, 2013 12:22:50 GMT -5
Appears that Clays may offer a quicker rise to peak than Red Dot based on the 5/50 trace.
|
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Mar 9, 2013 14:42:05 GMT -5
DaveW: Will do a few more to see.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on May 1, 2013 13:28:05 GMT -5
Which powder has more bulk to it TG, Clays or Red Dot? Pretty comparable traces.   |
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on May 1, 2013 18:27:58 GMT -5
DaveW : Would you believe I try to measure the powder column height on every load I trace? For those 2 traces, powder column height for each (in the barrel) were:
For Clays/ I3031 5/90gr ~ 2.584in.
For RD/I3031 5/90gr ~2.607in.
IMO the difference between the 2 might be small enough to be entirely due to measurement error. Even if it isn't, the difference between the two is pretty small.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on May 1, 2013 20:37:31 GMT -5
DaveW : Would you believe I try to measure the powder column height on every load I trace? For those 2 traces, powder column height for each (in the barrel) were: For Clays/ I3031 5/90gr ~ 2.584in. For RD/I3031 5/90gr ~2.607in. IMO the difference between the 2 might be small enough to be entirely due to measurement error. Even if it isn't, the difference between the two is pretty small. TG Or seating pressure for that small of a difference. Thanks Ralph. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Jun 7, 2013 14:30:37 GMT -5
What kind of bullet to bore fit did you have with this trace, loose-tight?  I am at that velocity according to my chrony with 5/56?? Very loose fit on my end, you can start the bullet with your thumb into the bore. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Jun 7, 2013 15:31:37 GMT -5
DaveW: Tight fit. Needed most of my weight to seat it. I wondered about that too.
TG
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Feb 3, 2014 19:37:49 GMT -5
Very interesting. The 209 was faster , faster to peak, and higher pressure.  How long is your barrel-24"? Regular or recessed plug? |
|
|
|
Post by TGinPA on Feb 3, 2014 20:03:13 GMT -5
Here is the story explaining the traces....Next...Plan to run the same trace in cold temps. Comparing Rifle Mag Primer v Fed209 FWIW: I obtained pressure/velocity data from a side-by-side test of a CCI rifle mag primer and a Fed 209A shotgun primer with the load Hankins describes in his posted video. To obtain the CCI magnum rifle data, a spent Fed209A primer casing was used as a carrier for the CCI magnum rifle primer. Using a punch, the primer cup from the spent Fed209A primer was removed from its steel carrier casing and replaced with an unfired CCI magnum rifle primer of the same (~.211in.) diameter. It was necessary to shorten the length of the anvil/spacer from the spent Fed209A with a grinder to allow the base of the magnum primer to be seated flush with the base of the carrier casing. Please note: The paragraph above is written only to provide a description of methods used in a strictly experimental test which IMO, poses a definite risk of serious injury, should any attempt be made to repeat it. Because the Fed209 steel carrier primer casing which was substituted as a carrier to contain the CCI magnum rifle primer in this test was engineered by its manufacturer for a different purpose, specifically for pressures and conditions encountered in reloaded shotgun ammunition, when used in any other conditions, there is a real possibility that the substituted carrier casing used in this test might fail or rupture, causing injury. Anyone attempting to repeat any part of this test does so at their own risk and for which I cannot assume any responsibility. Pressure velocity recordings are shown below. Also shown are photos of the spent casing containing the CCI rifle primer and the spent Fed209 shotgun primer used in this test. In each of the 2 photos of the primers after firing, the spent carrier casing containing the substituted magnum rifle primer is shown on the left. Of interest is the distortion present on the base of the spent unaltered Fed209A shotgun primer cup due to extrusion into the firing pin orifice and absence of this in the CCI Rifle magnum primer cup. Also of interest is the presence of significant bulging of the base of the casing used as the carrier for the magnum rifle primer. PN45 I4198 78gr 275be vwool 2/3/14 Large Rifle Mag Primer – F209 Primer comparison (23I Revised on 2/4)    25in barrel, 23.06in in front of BP. Standard Savage plug modified for Fishhawk bushing. Because of the bulged carrier casing I don’t think I want to try the LRMP in this carrier in a recessed plug. TG |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2014 20:32:07 GMT -5
OK, so the load shot with the 209 primer has a higher peak pressure and velocity?
And we're talking loose fit bullet like the Hankins gun?
Interesting!
I can't wait to see the results for the slower powders.
Thank you!
|
|
