I've met fellow handloaders who have destroyed modern firearms searching for that magic load. Or trying to turn a 9x19 into a 357 sig. The amazing thing is how few of us aren't amputees. Thanks for showing us your results and glad you were unharmed.
Presumably the ghost of Elmer Keith was hovering over their shoulders and whispering to them _"You know, son, you could probably still get more power out of this case capacity."_
Metal isn't magic. Push on it hard enogh and anything will fail. That being said, there are actions and modern steels that makes anything from a century ago look like tin in comparison. Literally 5 times as storng as what was used to make the cylinders and barrels of the time.
The thing about smokeless is that basically 100% of the solid powder is turned into gases. Blackpowder is actually mostly solids after ignition. The other factor with smokeless is that it releases all the energy from that phase change (solid to gas) in an instant. In a way you could say it sublimates, skipping the liquid phase of matter. Believe it or not, blackpowder does actually have a very brief liquid phase in its deflagration. This is why it burns more swiftly than smokeless in open air as the “liquid” holds the heat of the reaction close to unburned powder allowing it to quickly ignite neighboring particles more easily. Hickok 45 made a video briefly discussing this phenomenon.
The problem is, by the time one would play with the chemistry of smokeless enough to make a substitute, well, one has reinvented the already current substitutes. And one would also be farting with the smokeless on which base, dual or mono based and nitroglycerin just complicates things even more in a dual base. Still, his gun to experiment with, personally, if I had the money to throw at it for a science project, I'd probably do it as well - but, I'd not have the weapon in my meat skinner. It'd be in a vice for firing. And I'd go with a dual base, incrementing nitro and a decelerant to slow the reaction slightly, which means I'd need a powder chemical engineer to assist me, lest I find out whose religion is right.
Yeah.....I blew up a Remington with a conversion cylinder when I was about 18 or 19. Didn't know anyone that reloaded at the time. Wish the Internet was more of a thing then. You, 11BB, Duke and duelist1954 are the best for BP info
I inherited a Llama .357 Mag revolver, and when I started reloading the first rounds I loaded were the fastest .357 load I could find (Win 296 loads can't be reduced). I carefully loaded 6 rounds, weighing every charge and using a micrometer to verify case and overall length, then headed to the range to test them. After the 3rd shot the barrel blew out just beyond the forcing cone and my reloading career nearly ended right there. Fortunately I soon learned Llama revolvers made in the same era as mine were known (to others, anyway) to have been made with defective steel. I bought a shiny new S&W 686+ and the same loads worked fine in it. I've loaded 10s of thousands of rounds since then, and am grateful to those who posted that useful information about Llamas back in the dawn of the internet.
I suspect lama used pretty soft steel...might have been a tight bore...while you should not go straight to full loads...it sounds like you did everything correctly
You're right, it wasn't that particular load that blew the cylinder... it was that one and all the previous ones. Look at the grain of the metal left in the fracture zone, the different shades and multiple changes of direction in the immediate structure. You were getting some microscopic cracking that spread and finally let go. The metallurgy doesn't look that great either, pretty coarse grained for it's intended purpose.
I'm not sure, but I think it was Mike Venterino ( gun magazine writer, recently passed away) who had done a lot of shooting of black powder revolvers and rifles. He was involved in cowboy action and it wasn't long until original and new revolvers started doing similar to your gun. A lot were modern steel, cartridge revolvers . The thing they ran into and it took a lot of thinking and questioning. They found this happened in the 'old days ' some. When they watched the firing line, they found they had a lot of squib loads, some that were ok and some that had high pressure even tho they were trying for the 600-800 fps to be a required velocity for cowboy action shoots. The lower or light recoil loads both black powder and modern powder was causing catastrophic damage. What they finally determined was some shooters pulled the gun directly from the holster and fired while some would point the muzzle up first then aim. They called this 'positional firing'. The ones with muzzle up before firing had virtually no misfires the ones who kept muzzle down were the ones that blew up the gun. When they looked and researched, what happened when muzzle vertical, the powder settles.against the primer. If muzzle down, it is against the rear of the bullet, allowing the flame front to go across a larger area. I think they determined this to be like detonation or pinging in a car engine. You have multiple ignition points, colliding flame fronts, pressure went wild instead of a steady burn rear to front, pushing the powder and gases ahead, burning from one place. I had a friend using a light load of I think blue dot on 44 mag for target, less recoil. He started getting Odd sounds, blown primers. IHe discussed it. I have not reloaded but remember the article. I said don't try many more. Hold muzzle up before firing each round. The squibs went away, the odd reports went away. I cautioned him to not use blue dot, but I did have an old Hercules loading hand out that said it would work but a real small range. What happened after recoil, is the other cartridges would have the powder leveled out, read for detation problems. The old timers did use light loads, the cure being, load powder, add cream of wheat to hold the powder against the primer, problems go away. This works on black or Smokeless. As to a duplex load, black on smokeless, I can't say. To put simply no air gaps. If a bullet isn't down on the powder I. A muzzle loader, the barrel can and will come apart. That's why it's important to mark your ram rod to be sure the bullet is seated on the charge. Refer to Mike Venterino or Powder position problems. I'm no expert, just remember the guns that were blowing up for cowboy action
@@walterkrosch6567 This is pure fudd-lore with no basis in physics. The flame-propagation is basically instant. All the voids in between the grains of black powder conducts hot gasses fast enough that any "turbulence" would normalize by the time the bullet has started to move. This is why you sort the grains by simmilar size and don't mix in fines with your powder; This leads to inconsistent velocities. The only exception to this would be smokeless loads with flake propellant that can (and does) stack up like sheets of paper on top of one another. This is an issue with a specific type of powder, not some gar engine pinging. The physics is fundamentally different.
There is a way to replace black powder safely with something more powerful....In UK because of the very unreasonable and weird laws regarding firearms and ammunition, black powder is considered an explosive and it requires a separate license beside the firearm licence that is required even for cap and ball revolvers so they use the well known triple seven or pyrodex and so on, but they have made the so called nitro conversions which basically means a new specially machined cylinder which instead of percussion caps is using shotgun primers and obviously they modified the hammer and the firewall and that works perfectly, it's more powerful, cleaner and more reliable than the original black powder version..... this is just a suggestion for some eventual new videos ( and experiments). You being American can probably order a nitro conversion kit from one of the armouries that makes them....... I love your videos you share lots of good knowledge.
Pyrodex and 777 now need an explosive licence, same as BP in the UK. The law was changed a while ago. It's a free license and not difficult at all to get. Better off using BP, in my opinion, and there is no shortage of it either.
@@TubeRadiosRule yes I know that.... but that wasn't the point, right? I know that in America you can buy pretty much almost anything you want........ anyway my point was replacing black powder with something cleaner and more reliable in a safe way!!!
Both pyrodex and black magic now require an explosive license too. You may as well stick with gunpowder as its all the same license. Just make sure they put all the UN numbers on incase you need it
Thank you for this video. I made a note to self that I did not need to try smokeless in a BP firearm. What was interesting to me is the normal line is that the gun becomes a bomb and pieces go everywhere. That your hand would be gone and in this case it was underwhelming and you are right. Thanks for telling the whole story.
Glad you didn't got hurt. The reason why this happenens is the energy developed of smokeless is way quicker. A BP strap can't take those short strong impulses.
@@thormidthagahast8914 because one of their “associates” sold a pound of 4895 to a guy who bought a muzzleloader which turned into a pipe bomb. This happened in the early 80’s.
yep! Problem is slower powders don't burn correctly at low pressure/light charge weights. That's why everyone uses Red Dot/Unique for their "mousefart" loads.
Not in the least underwhelming to see detailed results rather than the vague, unsubstantiated exhortations we usually get from other, less thorough interweb experts. Thanks. You're what I'd call a professional, too. RIP Paul. I bet he'd he'd have appreciated this presentation.
I absolutely love this channel. I just received my first ball mill yesterday. I've learned a lot from this channel, and now I get to put that knowledge into practice. May the digital gods look fondly upon my digits and yours as I embark on this endeavor.
Well done Jake. You approached this properly with a sense of inquiry, used the right safety considerations, You did it 100% right.... and it STILL blew up. Yes you were right to not show that vid. My own Father in Law used to use combination loads of smokeless and black in a 45/70. When he passed I pulled every single bullet and shook out those pipe bombs. Old man and I respected him, but not his loads. I am not a great fan of Remingtons so, no great loss. One thing I did was the oposite; I have a 45ACP cylinder for a Walker so I loaded a bunch of 45acp in Black . I got a wild hair recently and shot some of those from a Colt Commander 1911; many jams and a BEAR to clean after. BTW: great Homage to Paul. Keep up the Good Work -Grey Pilgrim.
The line between success and failure is often whisker thin. Glad no one was hurt and thank you for the honesty. You may just have saved some curious soul's life. Cheers!
@@Everythingblackpowder No. Because it was already done. That's why the side of your barrel says "Black Powder Only" right on it. You just copied an existing experiment with the same results
I agree that the science is considered consensus when the experiment has been conducted many times with the same results 😊 I did, on my youth, develop a load for the old Iver Johnson .38 black powder cartridge. It worked well for hundreds of rounds, but I've no clue if it was safe. Probably not. 122 grain truncated cone .355 diameter, 1.7 grain Red Dot (barrel slugged .359)
So many people really don't understand the engineering that has gone into modern ammunition. The brass alloy (or very mild steel) of the case being able to stretch just a fraction as the powder burns really takes a lot of strain off the steel of the chamber. Because smokeless burns a LOT faster than black powder and thus it's not just about the total pressure, but how fast it rises to that max pressure that makes the difference.
I’m glad you weren’t hurt seriously! However thanks for sharing your experience with us. There is a video out there some where that some one showed the result of loading a muzzle loading rifle, it will definitely drive the point home that smokeless powder has no place in a muzzleloader.
If memory serves, from 1895 -1910 or so, Dupont made a smokeless BP equivalent back in the early days of smokeless, No. 1 and No. 2. One for rifles, and one for pistols. It was loaded grain for grain as black. It didn't last long due to being expensive compared to true black, and didn't have the best reputation for storage longevity, consistency, etc. As smokeless was evolving and being adopted quickly, and it wasn't exactly flying off the shelves, Dupont discontinued it. IMO, Blackhorn 209 comes close to the old Dupont as it's really a smokeless powder rather than a modified black powder like Pyrodex is. However, the price..... OUCH! Otherwise, leave smokeless to the guns designed for it! Great video showing why!
Just glad u didn't get hurt or loose a hand, and thank you for sharing the info and hopefully nobody else gets foolish to try to prove you wrong, you have everything right and properly just maybe next time use a test firing actuator stand so u do not get hurt. But anyhow great video, great info with honesty thank you
Some years ago a gun magazine did a report on this where modern revolvers sometimes had the top of the cylinder blown off as shown here. The article pointed out that powder should burn, not detonate. However running a reduced load of smokeless exposes more surface area of the powder to the primer ignition causing it to detonate rather than burn. so running a low charge of smokeless is a danger because you can never tell when you cross the line from burning the powder or detonating it.
If that was the culprit then why did it function fine with a lighter charge? I’ve heard this story several times and it may or may not be true but ether way, I don’t believe that’s why this revolver exploded.
@@Everythingblackpowder Smokeless burns unless it's confined. To get an explosion you increase the burn rate. Increasing confinement pressure and/or surface area will increase the burn rate potentially to the point of detonation. So like I said you don't know when you've crossed that line you're talking your chances. The recommended loading data for a Savage 10ML II might work but see the history of that rifle first. It's easy for things to go wrong. Smokeless isn't black powder, they aren't the same and don't work the same way.. Actually smokeless is closer to dynamite since they both have a nitrocellulose base. Cancel Reply @Everythingblackpowder Smokeless just burns unless it's confined. To get an explosion you increase the burn rate. increasing the surface area will do that too.
I have one just like that one! I did it year's ago when I was a kid. I'am 60 now, I hate to say, but It was when I could not find any black powder. So I got some 700X, and thought that a little would work! Well, ?Thank God, that he was looking over me! And I just got the scare of my life! Year's later, I fixed the gun, but still have the cylinder, as a show piece! And yes everyone go's WOW! So stick to black powder and substitutes ! I know they are dirty and smelly, but you can keep your gun and body parts! Great video for teaching! Thanks!
Glad you're ok bud, I'm all about that experiment life, just be careful when tickling the dragon's tail, we sincerely and legitimately need you around, functional and in 1 piece for a few more decades. You may not have a "science degree", but I do, along with a few boxes full of awards and stuff for being a rock star at it(before it died over the past few years). YOU are more of a true scientist than 99% of the PhD's, MD's, DO's, Master's and other "certified professional" scientists that I have ever met and worked with, and most of that remaining 1% left when the field of science and medicine died. Keep up the good work Sir.
Great video! The reason we have gained much knowledge about things is because people have conducted controlled experiments and helped set guidelines concerning what is safe and what is not! Regarding black powder and smokeless, there are examples of safely using smokeless powder in black powder firearms. I for one have a Pietta replica 1860 Army open top converted to shoot "STANDARD" .45 Colt cartridges with the Kirst Conversion cylinder kit. I also use "equivalent" smokeless 45/70 black powder loads in my original 1884 Springfield Trapdoor rifle. When done properly, the loads are safe and do not unduly stress the firearm. Smokeless propellants' however have a higher pressure curve than black powder and projectiles for the same must fit the bore properly. (I do not use jacketed bullets in the Trapdoor or the 1860 conversion.) BTW in your video, I did hear the projectile hit the steel target, so there's that. 🙂 The flip side of experimentation (where we groan) is the "Here hold muh beer, let's see whut this does!"
Great video man. I am glad you came out of that unscathed. It could have been bad. I seem to remember as a youth in metal shop watching a video of them making black powder barrels and proofing them by filling them to the top and of course igniting it. It was interesting. They all seemed to take the pressure
Thank-You! Red Dot is a very fast and iffy powder, and very easy to double charge without it being very obvious, so much so, I just don't use it anymore. In my opinion anyway.
Got to appreciate your integrity, f-ed around "for science" found out lost a pretty cool firearm in the process and decided not to publish. Good man!! Love your videos I have no need to make my own
One factor with smokeless that needs to be thought about is charge density. I was running some light 45 Colt loads using a small charge of WW231 (without filler) and after shooting many hundreds of them with no issues at all...one went BANG! Large flash, heavy recoil completely unlike all the others and while the gun didn't show any effects afterwards...it really got me wondering just what had happened. Shooting buddies said that I must have double-charged it...but my loading procedure on a single stage press prevents that and I visually check each and every load before seating the bullet. I intentionally double-charged a few and fired them in a 454 Casull and they were nowhere near the violence of the questionable round. Only thing I can think of is that the powder had statically spread itself around the case and all lit simultaneously and basically detonated rather than burned. This phenomenon has blown up more than a few cartridge rifles where light charges are used and before shooting they must be settled back against the primer for consistent burning. Letting someone else shoot the gun who doesn't follow the pre-shot procedure resulted in the gun blowing apart likely due to the aformentioned detonation. Best to use a bulky enough powder to largely fill the available chamber space.
That is what I was pointing out, light loads can be just as bad as overloads. Burns all at once, not progressive. Pressure spike happens extremely fast. Much higher than proof loads.
Thanks for the video Jake! It seems to me that Red Dot was not an ideal powder for that application. It fast and produces a huge pressure spike once reached a certain level. I'd use a bit slower and more linear powder like Unique. I have experimented a lot with reloading including charges for 45LC conversion. No way I'd put a "Ruger" load into a conversion 1858 but a mild "cowboy" load works very well there, so probably it'll work in a cap cylinder too. In theory :)
curious about the diff between cap and ball and cartridge bp revolvers in that, when messing around with smokeless is it that people use case filler in the cap and ball that makes it more likely to blow up as it reduces the air volume or is it something else? because a 1887 bp webley mark one revolver will handle light smokeless loads all day and they were even nitro proofed by the british at 13000psi.
That fine line between just right and too much pressure is definitely there and always has been for Red Dot powder in particular. I would use Unique if I were experimenting with smokeless in a cap and ball revolver. I knew a fellow who regularly fired a few grains of Unique and a SWC 45 caliber bullet in his Ruger Old Army. Thanks for the lesson and the video.
I'm french and i use only smokeless into my 1858, but, powder name is "A0" or AS, by vectan (Nobel sport). I have use Quick load to calculate the "empty" in a chamber and the pressure. I can explain u, or just talk about it with u, if u like. Love, an see you
I do this way too, Vectan AS or A0 (classic shotgun powder) and QuickLoad to calculate the chamber pressure so as to never exceed something like 900 bars. I shoot those loads everyday since a year or two and never had a problem. --- Je fais exactement pareil avec la Vectan AS/A0 en mode 0,1 à 0,2g de PSF et 1,6g de PN et ça fait 1 an de tir quasi quotidien sans aucun problème. Je calcule également avec QuickLoad de manière à ne pas dépasser quelque chose comme 900 bars (Army ou Navy en .44, un open top en plus)
@clemcz4018 peut importe, ça fonctionne avec des ogives à fond plat ou des sphères. Surtout pas la ba9, j'ai horreur de cette poudre, mais je suppose que si elle est préconisée pour le 45 colt (je n'en sais rien mais ça m'étonnerait), pourquoi pas, su moment où tu respectes une pression inférieure à 900 bars
@@guillaume7645 Salut merci, tu es sur du 44 donc ? et quels sont tes dosages ? J'essaye de faire des simu sur GRT (Gordons Reloading Tool). Il vaut mieux une poudre un peu vive non (ba10?) avec le bon dosage et une amorce 1075+ un peu puissante pour bien allumer la psf ? Tu ajoutes quelque chose dans la chambre ou juste psf + vide ? Tu as fait des essais en 36 ? Tu as mesuré tes vélocités ? Merci pour ton retour. C'est pas recommandé de faire cela mais si tous les paramètres sont bien maitrisés...
Did NOT suck! I run 7grs of Hodgdon 58 in my Uberti Whitneyville Dragoon with a 454 ball all day long reliably. My Pietta's I normally won't even try due to their inferior parts. I have broken hammer springs and cylinder hands in my Pietta's running 5.5grs of the same smokeless powder. Love the video. God Bless
TBH, I never noticed anything wrong with the pistol but did wonder why you had it on the shelf. Thanks for showing us. Glad you weren't harmed and maybe your video will keep someone else from being harmed.
Basically Smokeless will destroy your muzzle loader gun before you even get close to the performance level regular Black Powder will give you. The pressure curve is wrong and you can't change that. There is no reason at all under any conditions I can think of when you would want to do this. Powder you CANNOT make yourself, that is both dangerous and significantly weaker in performance. The reverse, however - black powder in a cartridge - I do every time I load ammo. Side note - see how the barrel is undamaged? The barrel is actually proofed for smokeless powder on these as they are frequently used with cartridge conversion cylinders. Lastly - had you done with with a .36 and not a .44 it probably would have held up anyway because of how much thicker the metal in the cylinder is.
Well at least you kept all your digits and got surprised by 6.5 grains of Red Dot. All your uploads are informative interesting. EBP is my go to channel
A long time ago, in a land far away there lived one "Clark Magnussen'' . Clark prowled the dark crevices of the interweb in search of persons who shared his interest in "extreme reloading". Clarks adventures were legendary back in the day and all and sundry shunned him, cursed him, and tried to belittle him. When you started the Smokeless in a muzzle load experiments, I immediately thought of Clark. Could "Clark" actually have been Jake in disguise? Glad to find that wasn't so, keep recording the results so it stays science, and if you get too powderhappy I'll make my own damned video. Not ready to do that yet, so keep the science going.
I loved reading Clark’s wild posts. I even tried a few of his “procedures” just to see if he was FOS or if what he was writing was true (shockingly, they were, at least the ones I tried). I wonder what happened to him
I have one factory made cylinder from my 58 Remington. And then I had someone who helped me. That was a gunsmith that made a custom one so I can shoot. I figure a heavier round, but I still have 38 bullet out of my 58 Room 10. In other words, I could fit a standard thirty eight colt in there now, as well
Check out the videos on Red Dot smokeless powder. It has a pretty notorious reputation. I have not done much research on smokeless powder, but what i have learned says that the pressure curve is more of a hockey stick and not a gradient curve. Pressures of smokeless powder can be matched to black powder, but the speed and pressure, at which smokeless powder reaches upon ignition, is far greater.
It reminds me of the slip joint irrigation system. Let the pressure come up slowly and everything is fine. Get In a hurry, and open the valve all the way, all of the joints blow apart.
You are absolutely right, loading smokeless powder is a whole different ballgame and the internal ballistics are VERY different. I am quite confident that it is possible to safely load a cap and ball revolver with smokeless, and I’m certain the powder that would need to be used to make that happen is way way slower burn rate than red dot. I have a smokeless muzzleloading rifle built on an H&R 45/70, and it is safe and lots of fun in my hands. Smokeless muzzleloading rifles are actually quite popular and it’s a path already well tested and traveled, but it’s not an endeavor to be approached with carelessness. A double charge in a smokeless muzzleloader is a guaranteed bomb. Using the wrong powder or getting the powder charge off by 10% is also highly likely to be a bomb. It’s probably for the best that smokeless muzzleloaders are not on the shelf at Bass Pro Shop. Really is an experienced hand loader only endeavor. I have done some Quickload simulations on what loads would be appropriate for a cap and ball revolver, and there are powders readily available that would only result in 10-12K psi of pressure even with a compressed load in a 45 cal revolver. I won’t post what those powders are here publicly since I’ve not tested them.
You never know what wont work until you try. Keep makijg the best videos on RUclips, Jake. PS: You should make some awesome shirts! I love your quotes ans the wife always gets a kick out of your " Go make your own damn video " quote 😄
Thanks for explaining the Remington. I asked about on your previous video and now I what happened. I understand your reservations about sharing it as well. By explaining the circumstances you run the risk of inspiring some idiot to use smokeless in his cap and ball and this same idiot will probably want to sue you. Or at least cause you to spend a semi load of $$$ on attorney fees. Me personally, I don’t care if you blow up your stuff cuz it’s yours. I’m one of those folks who believe stupidity is a self correcting problem 😊
How else would you know if you didn’t try but on such a tiny load? But Thanks for sharing your traumatic experience and sacrifice in resisting all the temptations! It is appreciated and Thanks for making your own damn video so we don’t have to! Kind Thanks, Many Blessings, Glad your hand survived and Keep On Shootin On! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania
I know it can be done in both pistols and rifles of smokeless powder in a black powder. Now I love the fact you tried, I know the mathematical equation to get the right charge, my thing, if there are any imperfections in the metal, it will find it. Just as you did, I feel the charge was perfect, but the cylinder had an imperfection at manufacturing, although not noticeable with blackpowder the smokeless powder exposed it to you. I find nothing wrong with experimental trials. Keep up the good work 👏
I have a friend who has a lot of experience with black powder shooting but virtually none loading smokeless cartridges. He had one of those high dollar Remington style target revolvers with a cartridge conversion cylinder installed & decided to load cartridges with one of those smokeless "cowboy" powders. I was seated at a bench several feet to his right & luckily a few feet behind him, and again luckily nobody was on his left side. He must have accidentally double charged one of the cartridges because when that one went off the explosion was considerably louder. It blew the cylinder into three pieces one of which landed on the ground in front of his feet presumably having bounced downward off the top strap which had bulged upward considerably. I heard one piece whiz by in front of me having sounding as if it went quite a long way. We figured the other sailed off somewhere to his left. Nothing of the two pieces that went to the sides were ever found. I believe those two missiles he created had fatal potential. My buddy was certain he looked into all the charged cases while loading & thought they all looked the same. However when you're dealing with a low density load with eighty year old eyes you can never be too sure. The point is you better know what you're doing & take all precautions.
Interesting video, thank you for explaining it. I will stick to BP in my Remingtons, i dont shoot the inferior Colts anyway 😂. As far as i am aware BP is still used to initiate ignition in a number of artillery rounds as if has a very fast flash speed and is good for getting things started as it were.
Great video. Could you elaborate on how the cartridge conversions are able to safely handle smokeless powder? I just picked up a conversion for my Remington and the chamber wall thickness is slightly greater in the front, but it is significantly thinner in the back (The chambers are drilled at a slight angle.).
Experience is the best teacher. There's stuff I know, knew, "book smart", but when I saw it with my own eyes, I still went "Oh, I get it"..... When you KNOW, you know - experience is always best. Nobody could tell you different if you have the experience, no matter how hard they might try, you'll know they're wrong.
Would love to see just what the limits are for conversion cylinders, so much fuddlore out there on them but zero actual testing them with smokeless or anything beyond the weakest borderline not a squib loads.
**I'm NOT saying anyone shod try this**: I have read rumors in a few places that the Ruger Old Army was designed around strength rather than looking like an original. With that criteria in mind, so the rumor goes, they designed it to be able to fire a chamber filled with smokless powder. What powder, I couldn't say. I think I remember one guy wrote Unique, but I don't know and I ain't gonna try it. How to get reliable/consistent ignition, again I couldn't say. Possibly the 209 primer conversion nipples? Again, I'm not gonna try it. I don't know if there is any truth to it. I do t recommend trying it... Just an interesting rumor I heard since you brought it up here with your Remington... Thanks for sharing sir! Love how you do your videos and the experimental approach you take to everything you can think of as a possible variable to week. Glad you have all your fingers still. See ya in the next one! Cheers
I like around 800fps. I use antique Trail Boss in my conversion 1858, lot less chance of double charge, I have enough left to last another 5 years. Seem so if cornmeal was added on top of smokeless it would ok-ish........
Speaking of pushing a firearm to its limits, I hand loaded some 300 grain .45 Colt loads for my Bond derringer. .45 Colt only barrel, not .45/410. Knowing that Bond used to chamber the same barrels in .44 mag,, I kept increasing the charge, with the intention of producing enough recoil to make me not want to shoot it, then dial it back to the load before that. Stupidly, I loaded both barrels as I did this... and you might be able to guess what happened. The recoil finally overpowered the firing pin spring of the other barrel, slamming the primer into the firing pin. 600 grains fired at the same time in a 20 ounce pocket gun. I thought the gun blew up, but it handled it like a champ. Bonds are absolute tanks, and apparently so am I, because I held onto it. It sounded like a cannon went off two feet from my face, and it took me about 30 minutes to calm down, with little "holy sh$t!" aftershocks for another hour or so. Definitely my most memorable shot ever.
I think the only firearm I've heard about can shoot a compressed bullseye is the .454 Casul but it's enough of a recoil monster with a regular load😮 Good and necessary video😉
The technical term is obturation. That is, the expansion of the metal surrounding the powder charge. When that metal is a brass cartridge case it acts as a shock absorber for the steel chamber around it. Minus the brass, the steel obturates. Less than the brass, but it still does. Eventually you get a fatigue failure. As others have mentioned, BP doesn’t have the same shock on ignition. It used to be a classic in the reproduction muzzle loading cannon biz. Someone would be looking for a bigger bang and try some smokeless. Long fuse, hide behind a tree. BANG! Cannon looks fine. Great! Another try, this time standing right next to it. A “significant emotional experience,” as the Chieftain would put it. Same with muzzle loading rifles. The first few shots might work just fine. Then you get the Looney Tunes barrel blossom. Just be proud that you are the first person to put part of a revolver into low earth orbit. Someone on the ISS looked out a porthole and said “WTF was that!?! A reverse meteorite?”
It is a game of burn time, pressure wave and the moment the charge changes from a controlled burn propellant into the equivalent of a detonation. Black powder is so slow burning (in comparison to smokeless) that long guns typically had 32 inches or longer barrels to get the most velocity into the projectiles. W.W.Greener ( the british equivalent of John Moses Browning) used to demonstrate the quality of the guns his factory made, by shooting them with ‘stout’ loads of black powder, and then take out an ordinary penknife and cutting off the muzzle of the gun to show how thin the steel was at the muzzle end. The pressure at that point being very low.
I shoot 70 grains of 3031 in my 45 caliber encore muzzleloader. It sends a 200 grain bullet 2700 ft a second with a 26-in barrel. Of course, that's a 209 primer so It ignites reliably versus a cap. I actually use the federal muzzleloader primers because they have a little less power than a normal 209. I watched somebody shoot just a 209 on an empty chamber and it pushed a bullet about 12 in down a muzzleloader barrel.
Glad you did that to show how unsafe it is. I do have one question that is, why use red dot? I'm not an experienced reloader but isn't red dot a quick burn light load powder? Wound it be safer to use a slow burn magnum type powder?
This is nothing wrong with destroying your own property for views. We watch to be entertained and maybe learn. Get a hold of me if you want that Remington fixed. I would be interested just to see if i could fix it and it would make for some winter time content. Good video.
I second that! At least he destroyed it trying something somebody actually would attempt and show them why you shouldn't try it, unlike those that destroy new things for the reaction of those that can not obtain them like those using the latest phone or gaming system that is limited release like a golf ball! They make these guns faster than we can buy them. He isn't keeping anyone from getting one. It was a common model in good times. In a post collapse economy with no imports from Italy, it would be a crying shame. I'm sure he ordered a new one to add to the second hand market since then, replacing the destroyed one. In the mean time, thanks for your contribution to science! Just don't needlessly destroy tins of caps please! That would be evil.
Thank you for your Real Science. Black powder is black powder and smokeless is smokeless folks. Great Paul Tribute Brother! He is Missed. Now. you take care and don't go blowing yourself up w smokeless ya hear!!! There's plenty of one eyed Willies, lol and Two finger Terry's. Keep your bawls and digits in tact all while you keep up the Great Science works. Cheers
I just about blew up a Pre 64 Win Mod 70 375 H&h I was shooting a cast bullet load with a 300 G cast Gas Check bullet and a light load of Smokeless It Detonated and Welded the bolt closed .After some work and checking the headspace I quit that program. A light load of Smokeless can be worse than a heavy over charge . Good to see a Man that can Own up to Science Remember Dawin is not far away.
🧐 seems you have improved the Design and Functionality of the remington good sir.... 😁
😂 oh goodie, that should start a fight!
@@Everythingblackpowder 🤣
😂😂😂
@@Everythingblackpowder 😏well it's better than saying a colt would have survived 🤐.......maybe
@@snappers_antique_firearms you'd be out in the field looking for the barrel if it was a Colt!!
Because you tried it, I don't have to. Thank You.
This is what science is for, lol
Nice Tribute to Paul!
miss that guy
Rip Paul Harrell. Great video. Thanks for the info.👍
@@beargillium2369We all miss Paul…
I've met fellow handloaders who have destroyed modern firearms searching for that magic load. Or trying to turn a 9x19 into a 357 sig. The amazing thing is how few of us aren't amputees. Thanks for showing us your results and glad you were unharmed.
Presumably the ghost of Elmer Keith was hovering over their shoulders and whispering to them _"You know, son, you could probably still get more power out of this case capacity."_
Most firearms are designed to mitigate the risks involved in failures from faulty ammunitions.
thats why you make your 9mm out of 5.56 brass
Metal isn't magic. Push on it hard enogh and anything will fail. That being said, there are actions and modern steels that makes anything from a century ago look like tin in comparison. Literally 5 times as storng as what was used to make the cylinders and barrels of the time.
Follow the books and youre good. Dont exceed max pressure.
The thing about smokeless is that basically 100% of the solid powder is turned into gases. Blackpowder is actually mostly solids after ignition. The other factor with smokeless is that it releases all the energy from that phase change (solid to gas) in an instant. In a way you could say it sublimates, skipping the liquid phase of matter.
Believe it or not, blackpowder does actually have a very brief liquid phase in its deflagration. This is why it burns more swiftly than smokeless in open air as the “liquid” holds the heat of the reaction close to unburned powder allowing it to quickly ignite neighboring particles more easily.
Hickok 45 made a video briefly discussing this phenomenon.
The problem is, by the time one would play with the chemistry of smokeless enough to make a substitute, well, one has reinvented the already current substitutes. And one would also be farting with the smokeless on which base, dual or mono based and nitroglycerin just complicates things even more in a dual base.
Still, his gun to experiment with, personally, if I had the money to throw at it for a science project, I'd probably do it as well - but, I'd not have the weapon in my meat skinner. It'd be in a vice for firing.
And I'd go with a dual base, incrementing nitro and a decelerant to slow the reaction slightly, which means I'd need a powder chemical engineer to assist me, lest I find out whose religion is right.
Yeah.....I blew up a Remington with a conversion cylinder when I was about 18 or 19. Didn't know anyone that reloaded at the time. Wish the Internet was more of a thing then. You, 11BB, Duke and duelist1954 are the best for BP info
Thank you. Was it in 44 or 36?
@@Everythingblackpowder 44 with r&d 45lc conversion cylinder
I inherited a Llama .357 Mag revolver, and when I started reloading the first rounds I loaded were the fastest .357 load I could find (Win 296 loads can't be reduced). I carefully loaded 6 rounds, weighing every charge and using a micrometer to verify case and overall length, then headed to the range to test them.
After the 3rd shot the barrel blew out just beyond the forcing cone and my reloading career nearly ended right there.
Fortunately I soon learned Llama revolvers made in the same era as mine were known (to others, anyway) to have been made with defective steel.
I bought a shiny new S&W 686+ and the same loads worked fine in it.
I've loaded 10s of thousands of rounds since then, and am grateful to those who posted that useful information about Llamas back in the dawn of the internet.
I suspect lama used pretty soft steel...might have been a tight bore...while you should not go straight to full loads...it sounds like you did everything correctly
Horseshoes and hand grenades. In this case, your horseshoe brought you luck when playing with the homemade hand grenade.
In the usmc, they took our grenades away because we were playing catch, and hot potato with them, along with a few other games...
@@joearledge this is what happens when the crayons get rationed...
6:41 "pretty underwhelming"
7:21 yup
Excellent video! Glad you decided to do it.
You're right, it wasn't that particular load that blew the cylinder... it was that one and all the previous ones. Look at the grain of the metal left in the fracture zone, the different shades and multiple changes of direction in the immediate structure. You were getting some microscopic cracking that spread and finally let go. The metallurgy doesn't look that great either, pretty coarse grained for it's intended purpose.
It almost looks like a cast part that was machined.
Period correct, then.
I'm not sure, but I think it was Mike Venterino ( gun magazine writer, recently passed away) who had done a lot of shooting of black powder revolvers and rifles.
He was involved in cowboy action and it wasn't long until original and new revolvers started doing similar to your gun. A lot were modern steel, cartridge revolvers . The thing they ran into and it took a lot of thinking and questioning.
They found this happened in the 'old days ' some.
When they watched the firing line, they found they had a lot of squib loads, some that were ok and some that had high pressure even tho they were trying for the 600-800 fps to be a required velocity for cowboy action shoots. The lower or light recoil loads both black powder and modern powder was causing catastrophic damage.
What they finally determined was some shooters pulled the gun directly from the holster and fired while some would point the muzzle up first then aim. They called this 'positional firing'. The ones with muzzle up before firing had virtually no misfires the ones who kept muzzle down were the ones that blew up the gun.
When they looked and researched, what happened when muzzle vertical, the powder settles.against the primer. If muzzle down, it is against the rear of the bullet, allowing the flame front to go across a larger area. I think they determined this to be like detonation or pinging in a car engine. You have multiple ignition points, colliding flame fronts, pressure went wild instead of a steady burn rear to front, pushing the powder and gases ahead, burning from one place.
I had a friend using a light load of I think blue dot on 44 mag for target, less recoil. He started getting Odd sounds, blown primers. IHe discussed it. I have not reloaded but remember the article. I said don't try many more. Hold muzzle up before firing each round. The squibs went away, the odd reports went away. I cautioned him to not use blue dot, but I did have an old Hercules loading hand out that said it would work but a real small range.
What happened after recoil, is the other cartridges would have the powder leveled out, read for detation problems.
The old timers did use light loads, the cure being, load powder, add cream of wheat to hold the powder against the primer, problems go away. This works on black or
Smokeless. As to a duplex load, black on smokeless, I can't say. To put simply no air gaps. If a bullet isn't down on the powder I. A muzzle loader, the barrel can and will come apart. That's why it's important to mark your ram rod to be sure the bullet is seated on the charge.
Refer to Mike Venterino or
Powder position problems.
I'm no expert, just remember the guns that were blowing up for cowboy action
@@walterkrosch6567
This is pure fudd-lore with no basis in physics. The flame-propagation is basically instant. All the voids in between the grains of black powder conducts hot gasses fast enough that any "turbulence" would normalize by the time the bullet has started to move. This is why you sort the grains by simmilar size and don't mix in fines with your powder; This leads to inconsistent velocities.
The only exception to this would be smokeless loads with flake propellant that can (and does) stack up like sheets of paper on top of one another. This is an issue with a specific type of powder, not some gar engine pinging. The physics is fundamentally different.
There is a way to replace black powder safely with something more powerful....In UK because of the very unreasonable and weird laws regarding firearms and ammunition, black powder is considered an explosive and it requires a separate license beside the firearm licence that is required even for cap and ball revolvers so they use the well known triple seven or pyrodex and so on, but they have made the so called nitro conversions which basically means a new specially machined cylinder which instead of percussion caps is using shotgun primers and obviously they modified the hammer and the firewall and that works perfectly, it's more powerful, cleaner and more reliable than the original black powder version..... this is just a suggestion for some eventual new videos ( and experiments). You being American can probably order a nitro conversion kit from one of the armouries that makes them....... I love your videos you share lots of good knowledge.
In America, we can order cylinders that take lightly loaded (cowboy action shooting loads) smokeless or black powder loaded cartridges.
Pyrodex isn't smokeless powder and is still corrosive
Pyrodex and 777 now need an explosive licence, same as BP in the UK. The law was changed a while ago. It's a free license and not difficult at all to get. Better off using BP, in my opinion, and there is no shortage of it either.
@@TubeRadiosRule yes I know that.... but that wasn't the point, right? I know that in America you can buy pretty much almost anything you want........ anyway my point was replacing black powder with something cleaner and more reliable in a safe way!!!
Both pyrodex and black magic now require an explosive license too. You may as well stick with gunpowder as its all the same license. Just make sure they put all the UN numbers on incase you need it
Thank you for this video. I made a note to self that I did not need to try smokeless in a BP firearm. What was interesting to me is the normal line is that the gun becomes a bomb and pieces go everywhere. That your hand would be gone and in this case it was underwhelming and you are right. Thanks for telling the whole story.
Fifty years from now , Ian from forgotten weapons. We will be reviewing "Willards kaboom"
😂
Glad you didn't got hurt.
The reason why this happenens is the energy developed of smokeless is way quicker. A BP strap can't take those short strong impulses.
1. Glad nobody was hurt.
2. That’s why Walmart stopped selling reloading supplies.
Because walmart cares sooo much for the people? Or Because they were told.
@@thormidthagahast8914 because one of their “associates” sold a pound of 4895 to a guy who bought a muzzleloader which turned into a pipe bomb. This happened in the early 80’s.
@@thormidthagahast8914 because they got sued. Also the lowest common denominator shouldn’t work around guns.
it was the pressure spike of that fast-burning red dot,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Considering the nipple is open, I wonder if you ever get the the correct pressure for Smokeless powder at all before the cylinder gives.
yep! Problem is slower powders don't burn correctly at low pressure/light charge weights. That's why everyone uses Red Dot/Unique for their "mousefart" loads.
Oh c'mon ..... ballpeen that top strap back down, wrap some duct tape around that cylinder and you got yourself a darn good 5 shot Remington 😳🤕😵💫
...With a sliiiightly too wide cylinder-gap XD
@@PwntifexMaximus 🤫
@@PwntifexMaximus nothing a bit of jb weld wont fix
Not in the least underwhelming to see detailed results rather than the vague, unsubstantiated exhortations we usually get from other, less thorough interweb experts. Thanks. You're what I'd call a professional, too. RIP Paul. I bet he'd he'd have appreciated this presentation.
I absolutely love this channel. I just received my first ball mill yesterday. I've learned a lot from this channel, and now I get to put that knowledge into practice. May the digital gods look fondly upon my digits and yours as I embark on this endeavor.
Well done Jake. You approached this properly with a sense of inquiry, used the right safety considerations, You did it 100% right.... and it STILL blew up. Yes you were right to not show that vid. My own Father in Law used to use combination loads of smokeless and black in a 45/70. When he passed I pulled every single bullet and shook out those pipe bombs. Old man and I respected him, but not his loads. I am not a great fan of Remingtons so, no great loss. One thing I did was the oposite; I have a 45ACP cylinder for a Walker so I loaded a bunch of 45acp in Black . I got a wild hair recently and shot some of those from a Colt Commander 1911; many jams and a BEAR to clean after.
BTW: great Homage to Paul. Keep up the Good Work -Grey Pilgrim.
Thanks Grey. I’ve tried 45acp black powder in a gi 1911. It ran 33 rounds before it jammed.
Duplex loads aren't necessarily unsafe
@@Everythingblackpowder this was my home made using Douglas Fir charcoal. VERY sooty
@@redtra236 You didn't know my father in law. These were.
@@EverythingblackpowderBlack powder in a 1911, I've always wanted to try that 😁
The line between success and failure is often whisker thin. Glad no one was hurt and thank you for the honesty. You may just have saved some curious soul's life. Cheers!
you could say the revolver lost by a whisker 😂
Try these Phrases... "The science is settled " and "if you disagree with me, you are disagreeing with science" it worked well for gov. employees.
“I am the science!”
@@Everythingblackpowder
No. Because it was already done. That's why the side of your barrel says "Black Powder Only" right on it. You just copied an existing experiment with the same results
@@kirkstinson7316 I see you have a highly developed sense of humor, friend. Take care.
I agree that the science is considered consensus when the experiment has been conducted many times with the same results 😊
I did, on my youth, develop a load for the old Iver Johnson .38 black powder cartridge. It worked well for hundreds of rounds, but I've no clue if it was safe. Probably not.
122 grain truncated cone .355 diameter, 1.7 grain Red Dot (barrel slugged .359)
@@Everythingblackpowder 🤣🤣🤣
I always enjoy your videos ,
Jake .
So many people really don't understand the engineering that has gone into modern ammunition. The brass alloy (or very mild steel) of the case being able to stretch just a fraction as the powder burns really takes a lot of strain off the steel of the chamber. Because smokeless burns a LOT faster than black powder and thus it's not just about the total pressure, but how fast it rises to that max pressure that makes the difference.
I’m glad you weren’t hurt seriously! However thanks for sharing your experience with us. There is a video out there some where that some one showed the result of loading a muzzle loading rifle, it will definitely drive the point home that smokeless powder has no place in a muzzleloader.
If memory serves, from 1895 -1910 or so, Dupont made a smokeless BP equivalent back in the early days of smokeless, No. 1 and No. 2. One for rifles, and one for pistols. It was loaded grain for grain as black. It didn't last long due to being expensive compared to true black, and didn't have the best reputation for storage longevity, consistency, etc. As smokeless was evolving and being adopted quickly, and it wasn't exactly flying off the shelves, Dupont discontinued it.
IMO, Blackhorn 209 comes close to the old Dupont as it's really a smokeless powder rather than a modified black powder like Pyrodex is. However, the price..... OUCH!
Otherwise, leave smokeless to the guns designed for it! Great video showing why!
Apparently my welm has been undered. I am quite surprised at just how "tame" that was.
Just glad u didn't get hurt or loose a hand, and thank you for sharing the info and hopefully nobody else gets foolish to try to prove you wrong, you have everything right and properly just maybe next time use a test firing actuator stand so u do not get hurt. But anyhow great video, great info with honesty thank you
Some years ago a gun magazine did a report on this where modern revolvers sometimes had the top of the cylinder blown off as shown here. The article pointed out that powder should burn, not detonate. However running a reduced load of smokeless exposes more surface area of the powder to the primer ignition causing it to detonate rather than burn. so running a low charge of smokeless is a danger because you can never tell when you cross the line from burning the powder or detonating it.
If that was the culprit then why did it function fine with a lighter charge? I’ve heard this story several times and it may or may not be true but ether way, I don’t believe that’s why this revolver exploded.
@@Everythingblackpowder Smokeless burns unless it's confined. To get an explosion you increase the burn rate. Increasing confinement pressure and/or surface area will increase the burn rate potentially to the point of detonation. So like I said you don't know when you've crossed that line you're talking your chances.
The recommended loading data for a Savage 10ML II might work but see the history of that rifle first. It's easy for things to go wrong. Smokeless isn't black powder, they aren't the same and don't work the same way.. Actually smokeless is closer to dynamite since they both have a nitrocellulose base.
Cancel
Reply
@Everythingblackpowder Smokeless just burns unless it's confined. To get an explosion you increase the burn rate. increasing the surface area will do that too.
My man, you are a master of understatement. I love your videos.
I have one just like that one! I did it year's ago when I was a kid. I'am 60 now, I hate to say, but It was when I could not find any black powder. So I got some 700X, and thought that a little would work! Well, ?Thank God, that he was looking over me! And I just got the scare of my life! Year's later, I fixed the gun, but still have the cylinder, as a show piece! And yes everyone go's WOW! So stick to black powder and substitutes ! I know they are dirty and smelly, but you can keep your gun and body parts! Great video for teaching! Thanks!
Glad you're ok bud, I'm all about that experiment life, just be careful when tickling the dragon's tail, we sincerely and legitimately need you around, functional and in 1 piece for a few more decades. You may not have a "science degree", but I do, along with a few boxes full of awards and stuff for being a rock star at it(before it died over the past few years). YOU are more of a true scientist than 99% of the PhD's, MD's, DO's, Master's and other "certified professional" scientists that I have ever met and worked with, and most of that remaining 1% left when the field of science and medicine died. Keep up the good work Sir.
"There are old reloaders and bold reloaders,there are no old bold reloaders"
@@LarryEvans-p7e They say that about bikers also
And pilots
The commercial cut in, just as you fired the pistol!!!!!
Lousy RUclips
Great PSA…interesting story…and you weren’t hurt in the process. Thanks for sharing this, and all of your experiences…..for science.
I don't ask, I don't tell. Your videos don't suck. Carry on, Jake!!
Great video! The reason we have gained much knowledge about things is because people have conducted controlled experiments and helped set guidelines concerning what is safe and what is not! Regarding black powder and smokeless, there are examples of safely using smokeless powder in black powder firearms. I for one have a Pietta replica 1860 Army open top converted to shoot "STANDARD" .45 Colt cartridges with the Kirst Conversion cylinder kit. I also use "equivalent" smokeless 45/70 black powder loads in my original 1884 Springfield Trapdoor rifle. When done properly, the loads are safe and do not unduly stress the firearm. Smokeless propellants' however have a higher pressure curve than black powder and projectiles for the same must fit the bore properly. (I do not use jacketed bullets in the Trapdoor or the 1860 conversion.) BTW in your video, I did hear the projectile hit the steel target, so there's that. 🙂
The flip side of experimentation (where we groan) is the "Here hold muh beer, let's see whut this does!"
That's some Fouchi level science Jake. Thanks.😂
😂
Great video man. I am glad you came out of that unscathed. It could have been bad. I seem to remember as a youth in metal shop watching a video of them making black powder barrels and proofing them by filling them to the top and of course igniting it. It was interesting. They all seemed to take the pressure
Kind of like my shelf of broken cranks/rods and burned pistons from going just a bit to far....lol
But that is what makes it spicy.
Thank-You!
Red Dot is a very fast and iffy powder, and very easy to double charge without it being very obvious, so much so, I just don't use it anymore. In my opinion anyway.
Got to appreciate your integrity, f-ed around "for science" found out lost a pretty cool firearm in the process and decided not to publish. Good man!! Love your videos I have no need to make my own
Thanks for the video. I have never tried Smokeless powder in my Black Powder revolver. I thought about it, but now I know better.
One factor with smokeless that needs to be thought about is charge density. I was running some light 45 Colt loads using a small charge of WW231 (without filler) and after shooting many hundreds of them with no issues at all...one went BANG! Large flash, heavy recoil completely unlike all the others and while the gun didn't show any effects afterwards...it really got me wondering just what had happened.
Shooting buddies said that I must have double-charged it...but my loading procedure on a single stage press prevents that and I visually check each and every load before seating the bullet. I intentionally double-charged a few and fired them in a 454 Casull and they were nowhere near the violence of the questionable round.
Only thing I can think of is that the powder had statically spread itself around the case and all lit simultaneously and basically detonated rather than burned. This phenomenon has blown up more than a few cartridge rifles where light charges are used and before shooting they must be settled back against the primer for consistent burning. Letting someone else shoot the gun who doesn't follow the pre-shot procedure resulted in the gun blowing apart likely due to the aformentioned detonation. Best to use a bulky enough powder to largely fill the available chamber space.
That is what I was pointing out, light loads can be just as bad as overloads.
Burns all at once, not progressive. Pressure spike happens extremely fast. Much higher than proof loads.
Thanks for the video Jake!
It seems to me that Red Dot was not an ideal powder for that application. It fast and produces a huge pressure spike once reached a certain level. I'd use a bit slower and more linear powder like Unique. I have experimented a lot with reloading including charges for 45LC conversion. No way I'd put a "Ruger" load into a conversion 1858 but a mild "cowboy" load works very well there, so probably it'll work in a cap cylinder too. In theory :)
curious about the diff between cap and ball and cartridge bp revolvers in that, when messing around with smokeless is it that people use case filler in the cap and ball that makes it more likely to blow up as it reduces the air volume or is it something else? because a 1887 bp webley mark one revolver will handle light smokeless loads all day and they were even nitro proofed by the british at 13000psi.
That fine line between just right and too much pressure is definitely there and always has been for Red Dot powder in particular.
I would use Unique if I were experimenting with smokeless in a cap and ball revolver.
I knew a fellow who regularly fired a few grains of Unique and a SWC 45 caliber bullet in his Ruger Old Army.
Thanks for the lesson and the video.
But that is a Ruger Old Army. Nuf said?
I'm french and i use only smokeless into my 1858, but, powder name is "A0" or AS, by vectan (Nobel sport).
I have use Quick load to calculate the "empty" in a chamber and the pressure.
I can explain u, or just talk about it with u, if u like.
Love, an see you
I do this way too, Vectan AS or A0 (classic shotgun powder) and QuickLoad to calculate the chamber pressure so as to never exceed something like 900 bars.
I shoot those loads everyday since a year or two and never had a problem.
---
Je fais exactement pareil avec la Vectan AS/A0 en mode 0,1 à 0,2g de PSF et 1,6g de PN et ça fait 1 an de tir quasi quotidien sans aucun problème. Je calcule également avec QuickLoad de manière à ne pas dépasser quelque chose comme 900 bars (Army ou Navy en .44, un open top en plus)
@@yannickramouillet3742 je ne mets pas de poudre noire par contre.
J'utilise, en gros, les mêmes charges que pour le 45 colt, sans excéder 900 bars.
@@guillaume7645 Intéressant, Boulets ou ogives à fond plat ? ba9 ca peut le faire ?
@clemcz4018 peut importe, ça fonctionne avec des ogives à fond plat ou des sphères.
Surtout pas la ba9, j'ai horreur de cette poudre, mais je suppose que si elle est préconisée pour le 45 colt (je n'en sais rien mais ça m'étonnerait), pourquoi pas, su moment où tu respectes une pression inférieure à 900 bars
@@guillaume7645 Salut merci, tu es sur du 44 donc ? et quels sont tes dosages ? J'essaye de faire des simu sur GRT (Gordons Reloading Tool). Il vaut mieux une poudre un peu vive non (ba10?) avec le bon dosage et une amorce 1075+ un peu puissante pour bien allumer la psf ? Tu ajoutes quelque chose dans la chambre ou juste psf + vide ? Tu as fait des essais en 36 ? Tu as mesuré tes vélocités ? Merci pour ton retour. C'est pas recommandé de faire cela mais si tous les paramètres sont bien maitrisés...
Did NOT suck! I run 7grs of Hodgdon 58 in my Uberti Whitneyville Dragoon with a 454 ball all day long reliably. My Pietta's I normally won't even try due to their inferior parts. I have broken hammer springs and cylinder hands in my Pietta's running 5.5grs of the same smokeless powder. Love the video. God Bless
If no one ever tried to push the limits, there wouldn't be much excitement in life.
TBH, I never noticed anything wrong with the pistol but did wonder why you had it on the shelf. Thanks for showing us. Glad you weren't harmed and maybe your video will keep someone else from being harmed.
I'm glad that you did this video it just might save some guy like me a lot of grief. Thank you Jake.
Basically Smokeless will destroy your muzzle loader gun before you even get close to the performance level regular Black Powder will give you. The pressure curve is wrong and you can't change that. There is no reason at all under any conditions I can think of when you would want to do this. Powder you CANNOT make yourself, that is both dangerous and significantly weaker in performance. The reverse, however - black powder in a cartridge - I do every time I load ammo.
Side note - see how the barrel is undamaged? The barrel is actually proofed for smokeless powder on these as they are frequently used with cartridge conversion cylinders. Lastly - had you done with with a .36 and not a .44 it probably would have held up anyway because of how much thicker the metal in the cylinder is.
I think all the pressure went out the top of the gun, and the bullet went down the barrel with the momentum imparted to by the explosion.
You knew the risk but were willing to sacrifice your personal revolver. Keep learning and sharing. Thank you.
Well at least you kept all your digits and got surprised by 6.5 grains of Red Dot. All your uploads are informative interesting.
EBP is my go to channel
Interesting. Gives me some concern when using conversion cylinders using 45 LC on Remington 44's.
A cautionary tale.
You are one lucky guy thanks for sharing your experience
A long time ago, in a land far away there lived one "Clark Magnussen'' .
Clark prowled the dark crevices of the interweb in search of persons who shared his interest in "extreme reloading". Clarks adventures were legendary back in the day and all and sundry shunned him, cursed him, and tried to belittle him.
When you started the Smokeless in a muzzle load experiments, I immediately thought of Clark. Could "Clark" actually have been Jake in disguise?
Glad to find that wasn't so, keep recording the results so it stays science, and if you get too powderhappy I'll make my own damned video. Not ready to do that yet, so keep the science going.
I loved reading Clark’s wild posts. I even tried a few of his “procedures” just to see if he was FOS or if what he was writing was true (shockingly, they were, at least the ones I tried). I wonder what happened to him
Jake you have some serious balls to handheld that revolver, knowing its loaded with the wrong powder..
Or a serious lack of 'little grey cells'. 🤣
@@hazcat640I like to live dangerously…
@@Everythingblackpowder So long as you keep living with all your parts still attached & working
I have one factory made cylinder from my 58 Remington. And then I had someone who helped me. That was a gunsmith that made a custom one so I can shoot. I figure a heavier round, but I still have 38 bullet out of my 58 Room 10. In other words, I could fit a standard thirty eight colt in there now, as well
Check out the videos on Red Dot smokeless powder. It has a pretty notorious reputation. I have not done much research on smokeless powder, but what i have learned says that the pressure curve is more of a hockey stick and not a gradient curve. Pressures of smokeless powder can be matched to black powder, but the speed and pressure, at which smokeless powder reaches upon ignition, is far greater.
It reminds me of the slip joint irrigation system. Let the pressure come up slowly and everything is fine. Get In a hurry, and open the valve all the way, all of the joints blow apart.
Lil Gun powder is the same, seen so many blown up guns from the pressure spike it gives off
You are absolutely right, loading smokeless powder is a whole different ballgame and the internal ballistics are VERY different. I am quite confident that it is possible to safely load a cap and ball revolver with smokeless, and I’m certain the powder that would need to be used to make that happen is way way slower burn rate than red dot. I have a smokeless muzzleloading rifle built on an H&R 45/70, and it is safe and lots of fun in my hands. Smokeless muzzleloading rifles are actually quite popular and it’s a path already well tested and traveled, but it’s not an endeavor to be approached with carelessness. A double charge in a smokeless muzzleloader is a guaranteed bomb. Using the wrong powder or getting the powder charge off by 10% is also highly likely to be a bomb. It’s probably for the best that smokeless muzzleloaders are not on the shelf at Bass Pro Shop. Really is an experienced hand loader only endeavor. I have done some Quickload simulations on what loads would be appropriate for a cap and ball revolver, and there are powders readily available that would only result in 10-12K psi of pressure even with a compressed load in a 45 cal revolver. I won’t post what those powders are here publicly since I’ve not tested them.
You never know what wont work until you try. Keep makijg the best videos on RUclips, Jake. PS: You should make some awesome shirts! I love your quotes ans the wife always gets a kick out of your " Go make your own damn video " quote 😄
Very interesting glad to see that your ok 👍👍👍👍👍 great video.
Thanks for showing what can happen? Love ya! keep up the good work!
Thanks for explaining the Remington. I asked about on your previous video and now I what happened.
I understand your reservations about sharing it as well. By explaining the circumstances you run the risk of inspiring some idiot to use smokeless in his cap and ball and this same idiot will probably want to sue you. Or at least cause you to spend a semi load of $$$ on attorney fees. Me personally, I don’t care if you blow up your stuff cuz it’s yours. I’m one of those folks who believe stupidity is a self correcting problem 😊
I would like my wigglets and jigglets to stay attached just as they are. Thanks again for the informative, don't be an idiot reminder. 😂
Another great one. I've always wanted to ask about that revolver.
Losing Paul was definitely a tragedy.
Cheers !!
How else would you know if you didn’t try but on such a tiny load? But Thanks for sharing your traumatic experience and sacrifice in resisting all the temptations! It is appreciated and Thanks for making your own damn video so we don’t have to! Kind Thanks, Many Blessings, Glad your hand survived and Keep On Shootin On! DaveyJO in Pennsylvania
Out there risking life & limb (literally) so we don't have to! Thank you, friend!
I know it can be done in both pistols and rifles of smokeless powder in a black powder. Now I love the fact you tried, I know the mathematical equation to get the right charge, my thing, if there are any imperfections in the metal, it will find it. Just as you did, I feel the charge was perfect, but the cylinder had an imperfection at manufacturing, although not noticeable with blackpowder the smokeless powder exposed it to you. I find nothing wrong with experimental trials. Keep up the good work 👏
The back-strap, what's left of it, did it's job of keeping the grenade together. Good designers. Thanks.
Glad your ok.
Thanks for doing it for us and I’m happy you weren’t hurt
I congratulate you for the tests you do because you learn a lot from other people's mistakes.
I have a friend who has a lot of experience with black powder shooting but virtually none loading smokeless cartridges. He had one of those high dollar Remington style target revolvers with a cartridge conversion cylinder installed & decided to load cartridges with one of those smokeless "cowboy" powders. I was seated at a bench several feet to his right & luckily a few feet behind him, and again luckily nobody was on his left side. He must have accidentally double charged one of the cartridges because when that one went off the explosion was considerably louder. It blew the cylinder into three pieces one of which landed on the ground in front of his feet presumably having bounced downward off the top strap which had bulged upward considerably. I heard one piece whiz by in front of me having sounding as if it went quite a long way. We figured the other sailed off somewhere to his left. Nothing of the two pieces that went to the sides were ever found. I believe those two missiles he created had fatal potential. My buddy was certain he looked into all the charged cases while loading & thought they all looked the same. However when you're dealing with a low density load with eighty year old eyes you can never be too sure. The point is you better know what you're doing & take all precautions.
You were lucky sir I'm glad you are okay thank you for sharing this very enjoyable and informative video six stars brother
Interesting video, thank you for explaining it. I will stick to BP in my Remingtons, i dont shoot the inferior Colts anyway 😂.
As far as i am aware BP is still used to initiate ignition in a number of artillery rounds as if has a very fast flash speed and is good for getting things started as it were.
goes to show bad things happen to good people also. God bless and keep looking out for you
Great video. Could you elaborate on how the cartridge conversions are able to safely handle smokeless powder? I just picked up a conversion for my Remington and the chamber wall thickness is slightly greater in the front, but it is significantly thinner in the back (The chambers are drilled at a slight angle.).
Experience is the best teacher. There's stuff I know, knew, "book smart", but when I saw it with my own eyes, I still went "Oh, I get it"..... When you KNOW, you know - experience is always best. Nobody could tell you different if you have the experience, no matter how hard they might try, you'll know they're wrong.
Would love to see just what the limits are for conversion cylinders, so much fuddlore out there on them but zero actual testing them with smokeless or anything beyond the weakest borderline not a squib loads.
**I'm NOT saying anyone shod try this**: I have read rumors in a few places that the Ruger Old Army was designed around strength rather than looking like an original. With that criteria in mind, so the rumor goes, they designed it to be able to fire a chamber filled with smokless powder. What powder, I couldn't say. I think I remember one guy wrote Unique, but I don't know and I ain't gonna try it. How to get reliable/consistent ignition, again I couldn't say. Possibly the 209 primer conversion nipples? Again, I'm not gonna try it. I don't know if there is any truth to it. I do t recommend trying it... Just an interesting rumor I heard since you brought it up here with your Remington... Thanks for sharing sir! Love how you do your videos and the experimental approach you take to everything you can think of as a possible variable to week. Glad you have all your fingers still. See ya in the next one! Cheers
I like around 800fps. I use antique Trail Boss in my conversion 1858, lot less chance of double charge, I have enough left to last another 5 years.
Seem so if cornmeal was added on top of smokeless it would ok-ish........
Unfortunately trail boss is nearly impossible to get now
@@redtra236 I think they stop making TB 4 years ago, there was something about masks, shots and a guy named Brandon that screwed everything up........
Speaking of pushing a firearm to its limits, I hand loaded some 300 grain .45 Colt loads for my Bond derringer. .45 Colt only barrel, not .45/410. Knowing that Bond used to chamber the same barrels in .44 mag,, I kept increasing the charge, with the intention of producing enough recoil to make me not want to shoot it, then dial it back to the load before that. Stupidly, I loaded both barrels as I did this... and you might be able to guess what happened. The recoil finally overpowered the firing pin spring of the other barrel, slamming the primer into the firing pin. 600 grains fired at the same time in a 20 ounce pocket gun. I thought the gun blew up, but it handled it like a champ. Bonds are absolute tanks, and apparently so am I, because I held onto it. It sounded like a cannon went off two feet from my face, and it took me about 30 minutes to calm down, with little "holy sh$t!" aftershocks for another hour or so. Definitely my most memorable shot ever.
I tried to and mixed it and won't try it again.thank you for sharing.
Great public service video! Glad no pets were harmed filming that. Too bad for that once nice gun.
I have thought of adding alittle black powder to modern smokeless powder cartridge to make some smoke.
Thank you for the Paul Harrell call back. Legendary.
I think the only firearm I've heard about can shoot a compressed bullseye is the .454 Casul but it's enough of a recoil monster with a regular load😮
Good and necessary video😉
The technical term is obturation. That is, the expansion of the metal surrounding the powder charge. When that metal is a brass cartridge case it acts as a shock absorber for the steel chamber around it. Minus the brass, the steel obturates. Less than the brass, but it still does. Eventually you get a fatigue failure. As others have mentioned, BP doesn’t have the same shock on ignition.
It used to be a classic in the reproduction muzzle loading cannon biz. Someone would be looking for a bigger bang and try some smokeless. Long fuse, hide behind a tree. BANG! Cannon looks fine. Great! Another try, this time standing right next to it. A “significant emotional experience,” as the Chieftain would put it.
Same with muzzle loading rifles. The first few shots might work just fine. Then you get the Looney Tunes barrel blossom.
Just be proud that you are the first person to put part of a revolver into low earth orbit. Someone on the ISS looked out a porthole and said “WTF was that!?! A reverse meteorite?”
It is a game of burn time, pressure wave and the moment the charge changes from a controlled burn propellant into the equivalent of a detonation. Black powder is so slow burning (in comparison to smokeless) that long guns typically had 32 inches or longer barrels to get the most velocity into the projectiles. W.W.Greener ( the british equivalent of John Moses Browning) used to demonstrate the quality of the guns his factory made, by shooting them with ‘stout’ loads of black powder, and then take out an ordinary penknife and cutting off the muzzle of the gun to show how thin the steel was at the muzzle end. The pressure at that point being very low.
I shoot 70 grains of 3031 in my 45 caliber encore muzzleloader. It sends a 200 grain bullet 2700 ft a second with a 26-in barrel. Of course, that's a 209 primer so It ignites reliably versus a cap. I actually use the federal muzzleloader primers because they have a little less power than a normal 209. I watched somebody shoot just a 209 on an empty chamber and it pushed a bullet about 12 in down a muzzleloader barrel.
Boom potential is why Howell doesn't do a 6 round 45acp conversion cylinder for BP revolvers.
LOL! Jake--doing crazy stuff so we don't have to!
What can I say. I like to live dangerously.
Thanks for mentioning Paul😊.
Glad you did that to show how unsafe it is. I do have one question that is, why use red dot? I'm not an experienced reloader but isn't red dot a quick burn light load powder? Wound it be safer to use a slow burn magnum type powder?
It was the only powder we could get to ignite without having to use black powder
This is nothing wrong with destroying your own property for views. We watch to be entertained and maybe learn. Get a hold of me if you want that Remington fixed. I would be interested just to see if i could fix it and it would make for some winter time content. Good video.
I suspect that bending back the topstrap and replacing the cylinder would do it. Maybe a replacement axis pin or fixing a bent hand or something too.
I second that! At least he destroyed it trying something somebody actually would attempt and show them why you shouldn't try it, unlike those that destroy new things for the reaction of those that can not obtain them like those using the latest phone or gaming system that is limited release like a golf ball! They make these guns faster than we can buy them. He isn't keeping anyone from getting one. It was a common model in good times. In a post collapse economy with no imports from Italy, it would be a crying shame. I'm sure he ordered a new one to add to the second hand market since then, replacing the destroyed one. In the mean time, thanks for your contribution to science! Just don't needlessly destroy tins of caps please! That would be evil.
Thank you for your Real Science. Black powder is black powder and smokeless is smokeless folks. Great Paul Tribute Brother! He is Missed. Now. you take care and don't go blowing yourself up w smokeless ya hear!!! There's plenty of one eyed Willies, lol and Two finger Terry's. Keep your bawls and digits in tact all while you keep up the Great Science works. Cheers
Thank you
I just about blew up a Pre 64 Win Mod 70 375 H&h I was shooting a cast bullet load
with a 300 G cast Gas Check bullet and a light load of Smokeless It Detonated and
Welded the bolt closed .After some work and checking the headspace I quit that program.
A light load of Smokeless can be worse than a heavy over charge .
Good to see a Man that can Own up to Science Remember Dawin is not far away.