Looking at the exploded case pictures, I would pay special attention to the extraction grooves on the other rounds. Something is stirring deep in my memory banks somewhere, but it just won't surface.

It's very possible that whoever loaded those rounds had their full-length sizing die set too low and bumped the shoulder back too far creating excessive headspace. I would get a case gauge and check the unfired rounds.

As has already been said, send it to Ruger.

Fixing the visibly damaged parts may not be enough and its not worth avoiding the price of postage to be a test dummy.

Every time I've had to send a weapon to the manufacturer (one glock that I bought online only to be surprised by a NY trigger and a M&P15 (undersized bore causing FTE) the customer service has been superb and my weapon was back in no time good to go.

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:
I just got off the phone with the rifle owner and he said he's got a whole box of the reloads. We'll meet this week so I can pull them and find out what his charge was as well as case make, weight, water capacity, headspace, etc...

Apparently, Ruger's policy is to not return, or destroy any rifle receiver that has an over pressure event. I let the owner know this.

More to come...

Tony.

It's easy to make a case pick from a paper clip. Give us some pix and find out everything you can about the ammo.

It could be a few problems wrapped into one as well. But most likely it's simple tho you will probably never know the truth of it!! LOL.

Can of the wrong powder left on the bench might do the trick.

I'd still ship the thing back to Ruger. They checked my .264 out, determined the action was sound, re-bolted it and rebarreled it and sent it back to me. Granted, I was having problems with Remington factory ammo, but still.

And truly. If the gun action is compromised, who wants it back anyhow? I'd tell them I wanted the stock back.

This is not a case head separation issue. Your waterpick would have done nothing to prevent this. Something else occurred. Let's wait to see what an analysis of the unfired rounds reveals.

I didn't say it was.

But the case did let go right in front of the belt or what's left of the belt which looks to have ironed flat.

Yeah. It's weird. Unless you know beforehand, they always are until you know what caused it. Then it's obvious...

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:
I didn't say it was.

But the case did let go right in front of the belt or what's left of the belt which looks to have ironed flat.

Yeah. It's weird. Unless you know beforehand, they always are until you know what caused it. Then it's obvious...

Then why did you even bring up the paper clip thing? It has no bearing on this case (pun intended.)

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:
I didn't say it was.

But the case did let go right in front of the belt or what's left of the belt which looks to have ironed flat.

Yeah. It's weird. Unless you know beforehand, they always are until you know what caused it. Then it's obvious...

Then why did you even bring up the paper clip thing? It has no bearing on this case (pun intended.)

I mentioned a number of things.

And I am not absolutely certain this isn't part of the problem here tho the case itself does not show a stretch ring. We have very little information on the rest of the ammo, load, condition of cases, etc.

Who knows, the guy could have used the wrong bolt in the rifle.

We are sort of brainstorming and speculating at this point.

By the way, something that doesn't have to do with this issue itself but is interesting nonetheless regarding Ruger M77's. I flatten bolt handles to make the easier to operate with gloves on especially with the righthand rifles {I'm left handed and reach over the top of the scope to operate}. In doing so, I have exposed occlusions on two which is interesting as we know the bolts are investment cast.

I've always wondered if occlusions could exist inside the locking lugs, too, thereby compromising their strength. I'm not sure how Ruger could check that or determine if the bolts are sound. But at least in the bolt handle itself, solid they may not be.

Please let us know how this turns out. I own and shoot a .300 Win Mag Winchester 70 and am following the reasons for this failure closely. Personally, I am averse to getting case of steel face, and want to know what went wrong, particularly if it was more serious or complicated than an overcharge, or a misuse of shotgun or pistol powder.

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
Please let us know how this turns out. I own and shoot a .300 Win Mag Winchester 70 and am following the reasons for this failure closely. Personally, I am averse to getting case of steel face, and want to know what went wrong, particularly if it was more serious or complicated than an overcharge, or a misuse of shotgun or pistol powder.

I'll keep you all updated. I've been talking to him and we're meeting on Thursday to get the rest of the ammo. He said he's bringing pictures of his physical injuries as well. He wears prescription glasses and they kept his eyes from being hurt. I asked him if that was the first round he fired or if he successfully fired other rounds and he stated that it was the first and only round he got off. He said the round hit the center of the target though.

I spoke with Ruger this morning and when I'm ready, they'll send me an RMA and will perform a thorough analysis. They will most likely be offering up a Ruger Hawkeye as a replacement since the Model 77's have been discontinued. They said not to ship along any live ammo but a note detailing the load recipe will be helpful.

Tony.

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:

quote:

Originally posted by ArtieS:
Please let us know how this turns out. I own and shoot a .300 Win Mag Winchester 70 and am following the reasons for this failure closely. Personally, I am averse to getting case of steel face, and want to know what went wrong, particularly if it was more serious or complicated than an overcharge, or a misuse of shotgun or pistol powder.

I'll keep you all updated. I've been talking to him and we're meeting on Thursday to get the rest of the ammo. He said he's bringing pictures of his physical injuries as well. He wears prescription glasses and they kept his eyes from being hurt. I asked him if that was the first round he fired or if he successfully fired other rounds and he stated that it was the first and only round he got off. He said the round hit the center of the target though.

I spoke with Ruger this morning and when I'm ready, they'll send me an RMA and will perform a thorough analysis. They will most likely be offering up a Ruger Hawkeye as a replacement since the Model 77's have been discontinued. They said not to ship along any live ammo but a note detailing the load recipe will be helpful.

Tony.

I've always had good service from Ruger. I bet they will take care of your guy there, whether he deserves it or not, so-to-speak.

I don't care to make any specific guesses about what went wrong, but when anybodies' handloads are involved and the case blows out, you have to think that the handload is responsible. Could be the wrong powder, or a gross overcharge (less likely in rifles, but maybe), a bad case, a bullet seated into the grooves (probably not enough by itself), or something else, or some combination of factors.

Two photos of the failed case don't contain enough information to make even a reasonable guess as to the cause of the failure.

It looks like the rifle handled it fairly well. I've seen failure that resulted in more damage to the rifle than this one.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
I don't care to make any specific guesses about what went wrong, but when anybodies' handloads are involved and the case blows out, you have to think that the handload is responsible. Could be the wrong powder, or a gross overcharge (less likely in rifles, but maybe), a bad case, a bullet seated into the grooves (probably not enough by itself), or something else, or some combination of factors.

Two photos of the failed case don't contain enough information to make even a reasonable guess as to the cause of the failure.

It looks like the rifle handled it fairly well. I've seen failure that resulted in more damage to the rifle than this one.

Yup.

The case head also appears to be damaged by the opening of the bolt as well as pressure. It may have been more or less "brazed" to the bolt face and the forced opening of the bolt tore it up.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 3/4Flap,

If you are in a humid/damp place, and if the reloads are old, and if the reloads were stored standing up, and if the powder deteriorates, could the case be corroded from the inside by acid? Could the top of the powder harden and make a minature pressure chamber?

quote:

Originally posted by mr kablammo:
If you are in a humid/damp place, and if the reloads are old, and if the reloads were stored standing up, and if the powder deteriorates, could the case be corroded from the inside by acid? Could the top of the powder harden and make a minature pressure chamber?

Tho I do not know exactly how it was stored, I have seen a case of 7.65 Mauser {Argentine} that exhibited exactly the physical degradation you describe.

But as for producing pressure spikes, I doubt it. But I can't say for certain.

This thread at the CMP forum is about deteriorating powders. The topic of old ammo might not directly bear on this catastrophe but this is very informative.

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=157820

Send it to Ruger. I certainly expect they would diagnose it for free, the only cost being shipping.

Back in the late 80s thru the mid 90 I was in search of the ultimate longer range Elk round and also living about 4 miles from a good shooting range. Was able to shoot very often back than. I handloaded and tested a lot of different bullet, powder, primer, and COL combination thru two different 300 Win Mags and Two different 300 WBY rifles. The testing included shooting groups sizes chronographing and miking cases comparing expansion to factory loads with the same brand of case.

I was learned there are a lot of variables when working with 64000 PSI cartridges such as the case with the 300 Win Mag that can get you into the red zone fast. Sometimes its just the little thing such as just changing primers. I leared a lesson with primers on the 300 Win mag a load that was working good with Remington 9 1/2 and fairly well with CCI 250 and Federal 215. With WLRM primers the 1st shot had hard bolt lift not thinking to much about it untill I fired a second round bolt lift was even harder. When I miked the two cases near the base they had expanded amost .001 beyond normal. Didn't gain much in veloity but the pressures sure went up a bunch. Another time I was testing a Loads with AA 3100 1st two groups were not bad. The 3rd group was a new can of AA 3100 (different lot numbers) all of a sudden the average velocity dropped a full 220 FPS with a 180 grain bullet and groups turned huge. On the way home it hit me that it was a good thing it did not go the other way with that lot number as I would have beating the bolt open with that kind of difference. Learned another lesson lots numbers of powder do vary sometimes a bunch.

In the case of the 300 Win mag is has a short throat and burns lots of powder every change seems more amplified over say a 300 WBY.

As for OP I'am looking at that Flash hole (what is left of it) in this case it looks it has expanded a shit load on the remaing side from what I can see. That is hard to do in a belted case because of so much meat in this area. I seen it in 223 a bunch of times in a 22 250 a couple times but never in a belted case. Between that and what looks like peening on the bolt lugs pressure must have been to the moon to do that to a belted mag case. I would not be surprise something like 4350 powder with a 180 gr or 200 gr bullet was involved here. My own experance with 4350 in a 300 win mag is its a very fast powder in a 300 mag and pressures ramp up very fast with 4350 burn rate. I learned early on 300 win mag are a little less finicky with slower powders.

Also I've had a fair amount of belted cases crack just ahead of the belt after numerous firings usually 4 to 8 firings but that is all they do. Nothing goes wrong with primer pocket or flash hole. That is also why I don't think this is a headspace issue.

I was supposed to meet with the owner to get the reloads but he just called me to tell me he's sick. I asked him to take a picture of the load data and send it to me.

Here's what's printed on the box he shot that exploded:
Powder: IMR-3031
Charge weight: 51.0 grains
Bullet: Hornady BTSP
Bullet weight: 190 grains

Here's another box that he never got to firing:
Powder: IMR-3031
Charge weight: 57.0 grains
Bullet: Hornady SST
Bullet weight: 165 grains

I can't find any load data anywhere that lists 3031 as an acceptable powder for a 300 Win Mag.

Okay hand-load experts, have fun! Hopefully I'll get my hands on the actual rounds someday.

Tony.

What I get out of this is the one he exploded may have been too hot for the weapon. Unless I'm misunderstanding loading.

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:
I was supposed to meet with the owner to get the reloads but he just called me to tell me he's sick. I asked him to take a picture of the load data and send it to me.

Here's what's printed on the box he shot that exploded:
Powder: IMR-3031
Charge weight: 51.0 grains
Bullet: Hornady BTSP
Bullet weight: 190 grains

Here's another box that he never got to firing:
Powder: IMR-3031
Charge weight: 57.0 grains
Bullet: Hornady SST
Bullet weight: 165 grains

I can't find any load data anywhere that lists 3031 as an acceptable powder for a 300 Win Mag.

Okay hand-load experts, have fun! Hopefully I'll get my hands on the actual rounds someday.

Tony.

Now we might {?} be getting somewhere.

You are correct. 3031 is not a powder normally used with a 190 grain bullet in the .300.

MODERN RELOADING by Lee {a compendium of other published loadbooks} shows a start load of 52.7 grains and a max load of 58.5 for a 180 grain bullet. I checked some old books and found only one load using 3031 with 180 or heavier bullets; 47 grains with a 180 grain bullet in Ken Waters' PET LOADS which is listed as a "Reduced Load".

To WAG the mind of this handloader, it appears to me the guy had some 3031 he was trying to burn up and decided to try burning it up in his .300. What it LOOKS like he did was interpolate some sort of "Reduced Load".

51 grains does not look like a hand grenade charge. It's possible other factors commingled to produce one, but I'd tend to say more likely is an overcharge w/ that powder. Get those other rounds, pull the bullets and weigh the powder charges. I wouldn't be surprised to find the guy charged the cases with more than 51 grains of 3031. We can speculate till the cow's come home on the details and it's easy to concoct scenarios where this or that might have happened, but 3031 is definitely a powder that could result in a potentially gun-wrecking load in the .300 if too much was used.

The use of reduced loads is not in and of itself a problem, and we do it all the time, but based on the guy's powder choices and their service history, I'd steer away from his handloads, but then, you didn't really need me to suggest that!!

These things must run in pairs.

Few days ago my Smith mentions he has a customers Winchester M-70 a pre 64, in .220 Swift, with a bolt that will not open. Well the bolt was opened, but wouldn't go back.

Wish I had taken some pictures.

The case ruptured and the primer was welded to the bolt face! The owner had pounded on the bolt with a mallet, but couldn't get it BACK as it had swelled at the boltface.


NO idea of the WHY. Handloads, supposedly the same load he used in the gun for years.

Scary stuff.