Log In
March 31, 2009
Offline
Mike I have no idea what will happen next. All I want to do is get up to the factory speed.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Chuck said
Mike I have no idea what will happen next. All I want to do is get up to the factory speed.
I’d be pretty tickled with anything within a hundred FPS.
Mike
March 31, 2009
Offline
Me
TXGunNut said
Chuck said
Mike I have no idea what will happen next. All I want to do is get up to the factory speed.
I’d be pretty tickled with anything within a hundred FPS.
Mike
Me too.
March 31, 2009
Offline
Here’s a bit of history. Bert and I have been going back and forth on the 40% rule almost 6 years on this Forum. Maybe longer.
In the 1890’s Winchester used the Dupont #1 and #2 smokeless powders. The #1 was similar to 4198 and is for large calibers like the 45-70. The #2 was used for the smaller calibers like the 44 WCF and was similar to 4227. Winchester started their development of smokeless powders in 1893. They started selling smokeless powder cartridges in 1894. After 1900 Dupont switched to Shapshooter which is faster than 2400. It is between Blue Dot and 2400.
So the 40% rule was started just before 1900. I’m not sure when the Lyman ballistic lab did some tests comparing BP and 4198 in the 45-70. But in one test they used a 420 gr. bullet and 28.5 grains of 4198 and the same weight bullet and 70 grains of black powder.
BP-1,268 fps and 16,400 cup
4198 – 1,267 fps and 13,900 cup.
I load at least 10 Winchester calibers using 4198. The 40% rule does not always work. I don’t have the answer but things are different today than it was in 1900. Our modern cases don’t have the same case volume. Try putting the old volume of BP in a modern case. A lot of time it has to be compressed. Since I have never fired a round, that I loaded, without the use of a chronograph I know the modern powders are hotter. Another reason to start low and work up.
If John Cort was still alive he might have had the answers?
A bit off the subject but is safety related. My friends shoot every Wednesday. This past Wednesday one of their friends was shooting a pre 64 Model 70 in 270. He totally disintegrated the rifle. Luckily he only got his face burned. He used the wrong powder. Be safe.
April 15, 2005
Offline
I have not yet found a cartridge that the 40% rule of thumb has not worked out well. That stated, I currently only load the following;
1. 25-20 Single Shot (should have been called the 25-19) – 10.5 grains (52.5%)
2. 32-40 – 18 grains (45%)
3. 38-55 – 24 grains (43.6%)
4. 40-70 Ballard and 40-70 Sharps Straight – 28 grains (40%)
I have yet to find an older (original BP) cartridge that exceeds the original BP velocity when loaded with IMR 4198 using the 40% rule of thumb.
As a side note, I also load my 222 Rem Mag with 4198 (25.0 grains under a 35 grain V-Max), and used 34.0 grains when I loaded for 33 WCF.
Once again, each person must choose their own loading information.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Obviously a published load is best but there are situations where the data just doesn’t exist. Sometimes it’s out of date, sometimes it’s wrong. I’m amazed that the 40% rule works as well as it does. It makes more sense now that I know it’s closely related to a very early smokeless powder. My go-to 38-55 load is 22 grains, arrived at before I applied the 40% rule. I generally use a heavier than nominal bullet in that round so it’s not exactly right but it’s very close. We know 4198 is suitable for many of the BP cartridges. I think an experienced loader should be able to safely apply this rule as a starting place. I think the challenge Chuck is facing is the really huge case volume of this round. Getting a small amount of smokeless powder to burn consistently in that big case is not going to be easy, IMHO.
OTOH it’s hard to beat Holy Black! I dug out a Cimmaron SAA clone and some 45 Colt BP and cast loads to let Jeremy P help me shoot today. Nothing like a big boom and cloud of blue smoke! It’s a bit of a handful but now Jeremy understands why the 45 Colt was held in such high regard 150 years ago. Some of us still think it’s pretty special.
Sorry to hear about your friend, Chuck. Hurts to lose a fine old rifle but we all know he was lucky.
Mike
March 31, 2009
Offline
TXGunNut said
Obviously a published load is best but there are situations where the data just doesn’t exist. Sometimes it’s out of date, sometimes it’s wrong. I’m amazed that the 40% rule works as well as it does. It makes more sense now that I know it’s closely related to a very early smokeless powder. My go-to 38-55 load is 22 grains, arrived at before I applied the 40% rule. I generally use a heavier than nominal bullet in that round so it’s not exactly right but it’s very close. We know 4198 is suitable for many of the BP cartridges. I think an experienced loader should be able to safely apply this rule as a starting place. I think the challenge Chuck is facing is the really huge case volume of this round. Getting a small amount of smokeless powder to burn consistently in that big case is not going to be easy, IMHO.
Mike
I picked 3 of the larger calibers.
45-90 Factory is 1,530 fps. I get 1,550 fps with 31 grains of 4198. That’s 5 grs. less than the 40%.
50-95 Factory is 1,350 fps. I get 1,399 fps with 33 grains of 4198. That is 5 grs. less than the 40%.
45-75 Factory is 1,380 fps. I get 1,256 fps with 25 grains of 4198. Obviously I did not go as far as I could.
I get 965 fps with 22 grains. So 3 grains gave me a 291 fps increase. That’s about 100 fps per grain. So to get to 1,380 fps I would need about 26 grains. That would be 4 grs. less than the 40%.
Each of these tests were 10 shot groups. These were not my starting loads. Except the 22 grains for the 45-75. This is why I say the modern powder is hotter than the old powders of the same designation. In a lot of cases the 40% rule should be 30%.
Use a published load as Mike said. If you have a chronograph you can experiment some. Be safe, start low and work up. Each of these old guns are different and so could your results.
March 31, 2009
Offline
I just reloaded five of the 40 EX cases. The first 3 were charged with 31 grs. of 4198. The last 2 were charged with 32 grs. of 4198.
This time I used a 44/45 felt wad on top of the powder. It was not easy getting the wad to slide down the 40 cal neck and sit flat on the powder. I need to order some 38 and 40 cal wads. I then used a small cotton wad on top. All of this to keep the powder near the primer. We’ll see the results on Tuesday.
March 31, 2009
Offline
I went back and looked at what happened with the 38 EX. The factory BP load shot at 1,595 fps. Barnes said to use 21 grs. of 4198 for 1,350 fps. or 23 grs. for 1,470 fps. 23 grs. at 1,400 fps. got me hard bolt lift and primers that were backing out. I settled on 22.25 grs. 40% is 36 grs. That is 13 grs. over where I experienced pressure issues.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Chuck said
I went back and looked at what happened with the 38 EX. The factory BP load shot at 1,595 fps. Barnes said to use 21 grs. of 4198 for 1,350 fps. or 23 grs. for 1,470 fps. 23 grs. at 1,400 fps. got me hard bolt lift and primers that were backing out. I settled on 22.25 grs. 40% is 36 grs. That is 13 grs. over where I experienced pressure issues.
Chuck… “hard bolt lift” ??? I have never seen a primer back out on an original Single Shot cartridge with proper head spacing… it is physically impossible for the primer to move out of the pocket by more than a few thousandths against the breech block.
I am of the belief that the reason you may be seeing the issues you are experiencing is because you are using filler material on top of the powder. As I have mentioned (several times), IMR 4198 is not position sensitive, and in all of the many hundreds of cartridges I have loaded with it, not once have I ever used a filler or wad to keep the powder piled up against the base of the cartridge. Dupont never recommended using a wad or filler with 4198 powder. By doing so, you are adding an unknown variable that changes the dynamics of the cartridge.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 31, 2009
Offline
Not only hard bolt lift and a primer that backed out some, I had to use a cleaning rod to get the case out. All clear signs of over pressure. The headspace for most Winchester rifles is .007″. So even a highwall can have a primer come back that far.
I have been using fillers for at least 30 years. Theory and assumptions are one thing but facts are facts. I’ve quoted several times the Authors who say to use fillers. I also have quoted the Authors who have documented an explosion that was caused by flash over. You are ignoring the facts.
Currently I just put a thin wad made to go over black powder and then a 1/4″ thick piece of cotton to make sure the powder stays by the primer. We will see what happens tomorrow. Base upon the facts I will make adjustments as needed.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Chuck said
Not only hard bolt lift and a primer that backed out some, I had to use a cleaning rod to get the case out. All clear signs of over pressure. The headspace for most Winchester rifles is .007″. So even a highwall can have a primer come back that far.
I have been using fillers for at least 30 years. Theory and assumptions are one thing but facts are facts. I’ve quoted several times the Authors who say to use fillers. I also have quoted the Authors who have documented an explosion that was caused by flash over. You are ignoring the facts.
Currently I just put a thin wad made to go over black powder and then a 1/4″ thick piece of cotton to make sure the powder stays by the primer. We will see what happens tomorrow. Base upon the facts I will make adjustments as needed.
Show me proof of any flash over explosion that has ever occurred with IMR 4198 using a correct (published) load. Frankly, it is you that is ignoring the facts… not every type of gun powder is the same. While there are undoubtedly some types of powder that do need a filler to correctly ignite and burn properly, not all powders do, and IMR 4198 is in that category. Bullseye and Unique are two more examples of powders that do not require fillers. Both are low case volume powders that do not need filler material. I know that I am probably talking to a brick wall, but I have 45+ years of experience loading with IMR 4198 and I have shot at least several thousand rounds of cartridges loaded with it… never with a filler, and never with any of the issues you are describing.
There is no “bolt” on a Single Shot high-wall rifle. Further, due to the 5-degree angle orientation of the breech block, it cannot bind unless the head space is out of spec. That is one of the better features of Browning’s superb design. If you are experiencing binding of the breech block, you have some other issue (problem) with the internals of the action.
I am way more inclined to go with what the powder manufacturer has published about their product than what some so-called “author” has published his opinion about in a book.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 31, 2009
Offline
I fired the cases today and will update after I take some pictures.
Sorry, the breach block was very hard to open and it took excessive pressure to move the lever. Primers backed out and cases got stuck. It only did this when the pressure got too high. When I lowered the powder charge the problems went away. This is all spelled out in the Forum posts for the 38 EX.
Another post with a lot of opinion and nothing to back it up.. Most every time I post I will add pictures or the book and page that I reference. Some of what you say I have given you the answers before. No pictures no proof, isn’t that what we say? No references, no proof.
Show us the proof.
March 31, 2009
Offline
I shot the 40 EX cases yesterday. All seemed to fire OK. I did something I usually don’t do. I jumped the load by 1 full grain. I should have re shot the 30 grains and gradually worked up from there by .5 grains. I have no idea why these pics are loading so large and why they are loading out of order/
So here is the data for the 5 shots. The first pic shows shot 5 data and the next pic shows the Summary of the five.
March 31, 2009
Offline
Because the pics are not loading correctly I will post a couple here. 31 grains shot 1,437, 1,434, and 1,441 fps. 32 grains shot 1,487 and 1,480 fps. I was shooting for a little over 1,600 FPS. But here is what happened next. The first 4 showed no signs of pressure. But #5 wouldn’t eject. After I looked at the cases I saw marks that are caused by over pressure on each case. These marks are called ejector swipes. Look it up. I tried my best to get a shot of these marks at 5 different angles but no individual shot would show the marks on all 5. Here are a couple pics. You can see the shinny spot at 12 o’clock on the first pic and the top of 2 case on next pick.
I am going to redo the 30 grains loads and go up by .5 grain jumps. I am also going to think about my filler procedure. I may have packed these too much trying to get the wad in.
March 31, 2009
Offline
OK, I have some time between my wife’s plans for me today.
Here is a page from the Ideal #15 catalog on page 130.
Please read the second paragraph. Dupont says to use filler.
We have to remember this data was accurate at this time. It does not mention the 40% rule of thumb or 4198. Nor the fact that the modern equivalents produce more pressure at the old equivalent charge a lot of the time. It also says not to compress the load like I did the last firing. 
April 15, 2005
Offline
Chuck,
You are back to the “apples vs. oranges”. Dupont did not introduce IMR 4198 powder until the 1930s. The “IMR” powders replaced the older No. 1 and No. powders because they were “Improved”. While the older No. 1 and No. 2 powders undoubtedly needed fillers, the more advanced (modern) IMR powders do not when loaded properly. I am of the very strong opinion that you are creating excessive pressure by using a filler to pack the IMR powder into the base of the cartridge.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 15, 2005
Offline
This is what you will find if you do some investigating”
IMR 4198 is generally considered not position sensitive for most rifle cartridges, including common straight-walled black powder cartridges like the .45-70, .40-70 Ballard, and .40-90 Ballard. This means that, within normal loading density and pressure limits, you don’t need to worry about the exact placement of the powder in the case for consistent ignition and performance.
Why it’s not position sensitive
- Burn rate and formulation: IMR 4198 is a fast-burning extruded rifle powder designed for consistent combustion when loaded within its published pressure range.
- Experience in older cartridges: Reloaders using it in .45-70 and similar straight-walled cartridges have reported no issues with vertical stringing or erratic ignition when powder placement varies.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 15, 2005
Offline
Chuck said
OK, I have some time between my wife’s plans for me today.
Here is a page from the Ideal #15 catalog on page 130.
Please read the second paragraph. Dupont says to use filler.
We have to remember this data was accurate at this time. It does not mention the 40% rule of thumb or 4198. Nor the fact that the modern equivalents produce more pressure at the old equivalent charge a lot of the time. It also says not to compress the load like I did the last firing.
Chuck,
That second paragraph does not say to use a filler… reread it carefully! It very clearly states;
“the proper charge should be used and the air space left unfilled“
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 31, 2009
Offline
Bert H. said
Chuck said
OK, I have some time between my wife’s plans for me today.
Here is a page from the Ideal #15 catalog on page 130.
Please read the second paragraph. Dupont says to use filler.
We have to remember this data was accurate at this time. It does not mention the 40% rule of thumb or 4198. Nor the fact that the modern equivalents produce more pressure at the old equivalent charge a lot of the time. It also says not to compress the load like I did the last firing.
Chuck,
That second paragraph does not say to use a filler… reread it carefully! It very clearly states;
“the proper charge should be used and the air space left unfilled”
Bert
You could be right? I read and re read that several times. But if I’m wrong there still are credible sources that say to use a filler which I’ve always done where there is large empty space. And these EX cases leave about a 2″ void.
Bert H. said
Chuck,
You are back to the “apples vs. oranges”. Dupont did not introduce IMR 4198 powder until the 1930s. The “IMR” powders replaced the older No. 1 and No. powders because they were “Improved”. While the older No. 1 and No. 2 powders undoubtedly needed fillers, the more advanced (modern) IMR powders do not when loaded properly. I am of the opinion that you are creating excessive pressure by using a filler to pack the IMR powder into the base of the cartridge.
Bert
Yes, I know that but we need to find how they went from the No. 1 and got to the 4198. Then see what Dupont had to say. This was the first time I had packed a load and Dupont says not to do it. I was taught not to do it. But I did. I will try another way to keep the powder down by the primer. “The more advanced (modern) IMR powders do not when loaded properly”. This is conjecture on your part. We are looking for facts.
I’m going on vacation. Why don’t you see if you can find the link between No. 1 powder and the 4198.
2 Guest(s)
