quote:

Originally posted by sourdough44:
Thanks for tracking down the load data. Just off the top of my head, 3031 is on the fast side for 'normal' 300 win mag loading, especially with heavier bullets.

When one looks through a few manuals for a cartridge, common powders come up over & over. One would be better off with a less common powder of similar burn rate than venturing to markedly different speed.

No reason to try to use up powder if it's not a good fit. I did not look at any data on 3031 for the Win Mag, usually it calls for 4350 or slower on the burn rate.

Of course the rest of reloading safety protocols factor in too.

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.

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:

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.

That's because 3031 is not for the 300WinMag; it's WAY too fast. Hodgdon's website simply refuses to list that powder for that caliber irrespective of bullet weight.

I'm still amazed at how the cartridge failed. Must have had a weak spot there.

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:
Here's some more sweeping generalizations.

In my years of loading, I have come to believe that if a powder is recommended by the manufacturer as suitable for that caliber and bullet weight, there is no way you can load enough of that powder in a case and still seat the bullet that would cause a kaboom.

I also tend to believe the bullet weight doesn't even matter. For instance, you cannot put enough Varget in a 308 or 223 and still be able to seat any bullet and cause a kaboom. You will have very hot loads. You will have cratered primers, even primers pushed out; but no kaboom.

That all goes out the window when you use a powder that is NOT recommended by the manufacturer. Yes, you can use non-recommended powders and get away with it, if you are very, very careful. I've done that. However, your margin of safety is gone.

3031 is a very fast rifle powder, like H322 or H335. Put in in a .300WinMag case with a very heavy bullet all bets are off if you make a mistake. You alluded to it.
We have no clue if it's 51gr. We do know it's a fast rifle powder and if there's any weakness in the case...

In answer to your question about Unique being too fast for .30-06, yes it is. You can inadvertently fill up the .30-06 case with Unique and then see what happens when you fire it. You have no safety margin; you can suffer from a detonation or an overload.

The damage done to the rifle represents a lot of force. Also, we were told that the bullet reached the target and hit the bullseye; that means it had plenty of velocity to get there in the proper spot from the charge AND the still mangle the rifle; that's an M77, built like a tank.

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:

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.

That's because 3031 is not for the 300WinMag; it's WAY too fast. Hodgdon's website simply refuses to list that powder for that caliber irrespective of bullet weight.

I'm still amazed at how the cartridge failed. Must have had a weak spot there.

"That's because 3031 is not for the 300WinMag; it's WAY too fast."

This is a sweeping, generalist's statement.

Many powders can be used for applications that are not "common".

For example, would Red Dot or Unique be "too fast" for the .30-06?

Well, that's news to me and many others who use those powders in the .30-06...properly.

But they can be misused, too.

In this case, a true load of 51 grains looks to be no problem.

SEE isn't an issue with 3031, and 51 gr doesn't look to be in and of itself an overload. So other factors likely apply.

Like the guy had a few in him and bumped the slide on the check scale and got 71 instead of 51 grains in the case, or the bullet was JAMMED in the rifling, or 3031 powder wasn't used but Red Dot WAS.

LOL.

We need to wait and see.

3031 as well as other similar powders like the 4895's can be used for a variety of uses that are not in some of the load books. And they are still totally safe.

This load wasn't, so we need to find out what the load and all other factors actually were.

quote:

Originally posted by dkjbama:
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.

quote:

Originally posted by car541:

quote:

Originally posted by dkjbama:
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.

300 WM's are a belted case and headspace on the belt, this wont do it, it will just fireform the casing

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:
Here's some more sweeping generalizations.

In my years of loading, I have come to believe that if a powder is recommended by the manufacturer as suitable for that caliber and bullet weight, there is no way you can load enough of that powder in a case and still seat the bullet that would cause a kaboom.

I also tend to believe the bullet weight doesn't even matter. For instance, you cannot put enough Varget in a 308 or 223 and still be able to seat any bullet and cause a kaboom. You will have very hot loads. You will have cratered primers, even primers pushed out; but no kaboom.

That all goes out the window when you use a powder that is NOT recommended by the manufacturer. Yes, you can use non-recommended powders and get away with it, if you are very, very careful. I've done that. However, your margin of safety is gone.

3031 is a very fast rifle powder, like H322 or H335. Put in in a .300WinMag case with a very heavy bullet all bets are off if you make a mistake. You alluded to it.
We have no clue if it's 51gr. We do know it's a fast rifle powder and if there's any weakness in the case...

In answer to your question about Unique being too fast for .30-06, yes it is. You can inadvertently fill up the .30-06 case with Unique and then see what happens when you fire it. You have no safety margin; you can suffer from a detonation or an overload.

The damage done to the rifle represents a lot of force. Also, we were told that the bullet reached the target and hit the bullseye; that means it had plenty of velocity to get there in the proper spot from the charge AND the still mangle the rifle; that's an M77, built like a tank.

There is a lot of wrong in this post. Both from a safety standpoint and a practical use standpoint.

I'd strongly recommend that newcomers and others who have no experience handloading but might be interested in handloading simply erase it from your minds.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:

I think you may be missing NikonUser’s point. He is saying that published data generally uses powders with enough loaf to mostly fill the case. This makes it more difficult to destroy a rifle because the case overfills before you get enough overcharge to destroy the rifle. With higher loaf powders, you cannot seat a heavier bullet without reducing the amount of powder. When you go outside of published data, using something like 3031 in a 300WM, it is now possible to overcharge or even double charge a case to the point it will explode. The point is less true with handgun loadings, there being more opportunity to use fast powder in large cases, like Unique in 44 Mag.

There are exceptions, like when the loading manual is wrong. For example, Hodgon’s current data for the new 4955 powder in the 270 Win is way off. The starting load extracted the primer for me (but it didn’t blow the gun up ). This is why you should always start at the beginning load, even with published data.

In summary, the gist of NikonUser’s point is that you should stay with published data because it has a higher safety margin. This is good, not bad, advice for anybody, especially novices.

quote:

Used wrong powder (most often pistol powder) instead of rifle powder.

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:
As I said, it's best to know what you are talking about before you start making sweeping statements, especially statements involving potentially hazardous activities like handloading.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:

quote:

Originally posted by 3/4Flap:
As I said, it's best to know what you are talking about before you start making sweeping statements, especially statements involving potentially hazardous activities like handloading.

^^

NikonUser and I both are advocating for powder choices that miminize the risk of danger. You, OTOH, are bringing into play specialized loads such as reduced lead loads using pistol powders. Nobody said it can’t be done, but most MAINSTREAM data recommends the use of powders that minimize the chances of over charges. Also, those who care about hitting targets at 1000 yards will choose high loaf powders, not a 20% of capacity pistol powder. Some manuals (Nosler) even publish their loaf percentage with their data.

For the beginning loader, a powder and bullet weight that is well tailored to the cartridge being loaded is a safer way to load. To put it another way, no 270 Win has ever been destroyed using 4831 with any bullet weight, but I bet we can find one that’s come loose from somebody trying to use Bullseye/Unique/Red Dot/etc.

quote:

There is a lot of wrong in this post. Both from a safety standpoint and a practical use standpoint.

I'd strongly recommend that newcomers and others who have no experience handloading but might be interested in handloading simply erase it from your minds.

quote:

As I said, it's best to know what you are talking about before you start making sweeping statements, especially statements involving potentially hazardous activities like hand loading.

quote:

You continue to demonstrate your ignorance.

quote:

Sorry, but just because you have no interest or are ignorant of some aspect of handloading as you have made abundantly clear here,

quote:

You have been making sweeping and ignorant statements about handloading that expose your lack of knowledge of the subject and your lack of experience and interest in some aspects of it. It's that simple, and every time you post more you simple reinforce that fact.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
3/4 Flap,


...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

quote:

Load Density

Most reloaders understand that the wrong amount or type of powder will not produce accurate results no matter how much care has been taken to make each round. Powders certainly are not the same. Some purists make sure no rock is left unturned while searching for the optimum load and will test every powder that can be safely fired in a particular caliber. This can be costly and time consuming.so here is an old technique that will help identify powders worthy of testing.

LOAD DENSITY THEORY

Powders with similar burn rates (quickness) as listed in a reloading manual often will not deliver similar results. There is a simple reason for this. Burn rate is only one powder characteristic and may not be the primary factor which contributes to accuracy in a particular caliber. Composition and granule shape also affects the powder's performance and can vary between powders of similar burn rates. The burn rate of a powder is controlled by its base composition, granule size, granule shape and often a coating on the granules. These design features also change the density of powder so that for a given weight there is more or less gas energy produced for a given volume that the powder occupies.

Ballisticians have long recognized that the volume of powder in a cartridge effects the accuracy of a load. A powder charge that completely fills the space under the bullet is often more accurate. It is theorized that this helps promote more consistent ignition and rise in pressure behind the bullet, more consistent velocities and therefore greater accuracy. Indeed this can be seen with instrumentation that captures the pressure curve.

The percent of the available powder space under the bullet filled by the powder is called the "load density". As the load density is reduced (powder doesn't fill case), the point of peak pressure moves toward the muzzle and velocity falls off. Low load density can cause another problem. With a partially filled case the powder charge can shift to change ignition and the shape of the pressure curve. Increasing the load density moves the point of peak pressure backward toward the chamber and increases velocity. Since the powder cannot shift within the cartridge, ignition and pressure is more uniform, resulting in more consistent velocities and better accuracy.

Also, for most good loads the powder is burned a few inches beyond the point of peak pressure, but if the firearm has a short barrel and low load density, the peak pressure may move further toward the muzzle resulting in excessive "muzzle flash". Excessive muzzle flash happens when unburned powder ignites at the muzzle, causing turbulence behind the bullet with a detrimental effect on accuracy.

There is often a direct relationship between the burn rate (quickness of the powder) and the space a safe powder charge will fill. Powders can be made to burn quicker by reducing the granule size, which increases its density so a given charge weight takes up less space. Switching to a quicker powder may not resolve a muzzle flash problem if the powder has a high density and doesn't fill the case. Instead, filling the case completely with a lower density, but slower powder (as listed in a load table), may hold the point of peak pressure nearer the chamber for a complete burn, less muzzle flash and better accuracy. This is why some reloaders prefer slight compression loads.

Reloaders interested in accuracy have loaded cartridges originally designed for black powder with smokeless powder and everything from cereal to cardboard wads in an effort to fill the excess space. The safety of this practice is questionable and should NEVER be attempted without first consulting a reliable load reference, but those who use fillers swear by the results. This practice is further testament to the validity of load density theory.

If you do not own software that will calculate load densities there is a manual method that will work. First it is necessary to determine the powder capacity of the cartridge. To do this, file a small notch inside the mouth of a fired but not decapped case so it extends from the rim of the case to a point just beneath the bullet's base when it is seated. Weigh the case and bullet. Fill the case with water and carefully seat the bullet while displacing water out the notch filed in the mouth. Weigh the water filled case and bullet again. The difference in weights is the powder capacity of the cartridge in grains of water.

Next, you must know the bulk density of the powder you are using. Some powder companies publish bulk densities, others force you to find the bulk density yourself. The bulk density of powder is most commonly expressed as grams per cubic centimeter (g/cc). Since the weight of one cc of water is nearly always 1 gram, a bulk density of 0.970 g/cc means the powder is 97% as dense as water. Bulk density is therefore also the powder's weight in any volume divided by the weight of water filling the same volume. To find the bulk density for a powder first weigh a container (large as practical for your reloading scale) to determine its weight. Then weigh it filled to the top with powder. Fill the empty container with water and weigh it again. Divide the weight of powder the container will hold by the weight of water it will hold. The result (1.000 or less) is the bulk density of the powder.

To finish the calculation use these formulae: Cartridge Cap. in gr. of H20 * Powder's Bulk Density = Cartridge's Powder Capacity Powder Charge in gr. / Cartridge's Powder Capacity = Load Density

The Sierra load manu is ideally suited for load density analysis because powder charges are arranged under an estimated velocity column. Select a velocity column that is close to what you hope to achieve and calculate the load densities using the indicated powder charges.

Most powder companies will admit that the bulk density of production lots differ by as much as ±10%. You should consider this limitation when comparing load densities. Powders that produce load densities within 10% of each other may provide similar results and should not be eliminated from consideration. All rules are made to be broken. The theory of load density related to accuracy is not entirely foolproof, particularly when applied to certain cartridges and/or free bored chambers. Any safe charge producing a load density of 80% or more may be worth testing if powders with higher densities do not produce the desired result.

The following output from our software demonstrates a typical load density analysis. Powders commonly used for this heavy bullet in a 30-06 are those which also produce that best load density and the powders at the bottom of the ranking are not even listed in most load manuals for this bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
Here's some clarification about why one should choose a powder with proper load density.