A cautionary tale - lucky man

bit of araldite and some duct tape and she'lll be fine.

question: title implies a double charge of powder but surely space would be an issue in the cartridge? no way I could get a double charge in a 270 without it spilling out the neck.

the story however mentions pistol vs rifle powder and a mix of the two.
is pistol powder very fast burning vs rifle powder?
 
bit of araldite and some duct tape and she'lll be fine.

question: title implies a double charge of powder but surely space would be an issue in the cartridge? no way I could get a double charge in a 270 without it spilling out the neck.

the story however mentions pistol vs rifle powder and a mix of the two.
is pistol powder very fast burning vs rifle powder?

Hell yeah! I can get the same pressure in my .357 Mag pistol with 6.9 grs of Bullseye and 17.0grs of IMR4227, 17.0grs of Bullseye would turn the pistol into scrap, only have the correct powder on your bench when reloading.
 
bit of araldite and some duct tape and she'lll be fine.

question: title implies a double charge of powder but surely space would be an issue in the cartridge? no way I could get a double charge in a 270 without it spilling out the neck.

the story however mentions pistol vs rifle powder and a mix of the two.
is pistol powder very fast burning vs rifle powder?

Most pistol powders are very fast. Duplex loads are when you put in a timy bit of pistol powder to get better ignition (higher velocity, cleaner burn...insert any reason) from rifle powders. It is a STUPID & DANGEROUS practice that has been out of vogue since the 1950's. This was just another a$$ hole trying to reinvent the wheel. Idiot! ~Muir
 
]It is a STUPID & DANGEROUS practice that has been out of vogue since the 1950's. This was just another a$$ hole trying to reinvent the wheel. Idiot! ~Muir[/QUOTE

Hmmm sounds like a Remington employee :evil: they keep trying to do that hence the 260, 7-08 etc....


Also perhaps investment castings and plastic are not such a good idea in gunmaking after all!
 
Nope. It won't matter. I've seen some very good rifles trashed by someone trying to put in 2 grains of Bullseye pistol powder behind 55 grains of 5010 machinegun powder. The last was a Model 70 Winchester in 30-06. The owner was an old-school idiot who knew better than the powder makers who denounce "duplex" loads with vigor. Blew off the extractor, set the locking lugs back, stripped the mag and trigger guard screws out of the receiver, and fractured the stock.

For a while, it was a popular practice to put in smokeless powder behind black powder to help it burn cleaner. Stupidity, as black powder is 44% non combustible solids anyhow, but it took a few rifles blowing up to convince people it was a bad practice.

Not sure about the 260 and 7-08 reference....~Muir
 
Ahhh Muir,


Not sure about the 260 and 7-08 reference....~Muir

Remington being stuck for genuine ideas just re-hashed proven old numbers and with fancy ad campaigns voila the 260 and 7-08 Remington is born.. All the development was done by others. The only true cartridge I can think of that Remington did develop is the .222.

Sorry but am still trying to work out the so called short action advantage :confused:
 
Ahhh Muir,




Remington being stuck for genuine ideas just re-hashed proven old numbers and with fancy ad campaigns voila the 260 and 7-08 Remington is born.. All the development was done by others. The only true cartridge I can think of that Remington did develop is the .222.

Sorry but am still trying to work out the so called short action advantage :confused:

Gottcha!:D I'm still stuck on that short action thing as well...~Muir
 
Ahhh Muir,




Remington being stuck for genuine ideas just re-hashed proven old numbers and with fancy ad campaigns voila the 260 and 7-08 Remington is born.. All the development was done by others. The only true cartridge I can think of that Remington did develop is the .222.

Sorry but am still trying to work out the so called short action advantage :confused:
count me in as another
 
Ahhh Muir,




Remington being stuck for genuine ideas just re-hashed proven old numbers and with fancy ad campaigns voila the 260 and 7-08 Remington is born.. All the development was done by others. The only true cartridge I can think of that Remington did develop is the .222.

Sorry but am still trying to work out the so called short action advantage :confused:

I am with you, short actions for the .222 family only
 
Ahhh Muir,




Remington being stuck for genuine ideas just re-hashed proven old numbers and with fancy ad campaigns voila the 260 and 7-08 Remington is born.. All the development was done by others. The only true cartridge I can think of that Remington did develop is the .222.

Sorry but am still trying to work out the so called short action advantage :confused:

I think this called a tangent, or at bet tenious link :confused:
 
Most pistol powders are very fast. Duplex loads are when you put in a timy bit of pistol powder to get better ignition (higher velocity, cleaner burn...insert any reason) from rifle powders. It is a STUPID & DANGEROUS practice that has been out of vogue since the 1950's. This was just another a$$ hole trying to reinvent the wheel. Idiot! ~Muir

Well, I guess that makes me a "STUPID, DANGEROUS a$$ hole", as I have been developing and using duplex and triplex loads for years, and:
1) NEVER had a problem, and
2) Achieved the results I was after.

Experimenting with powder charges is dangerous for those that know nothing about what they are doing or HOW powder burns. However, "civilization as we know it" doesn't end when someone used duplex loads correctly, and not even when someone uses them incorrectly, as is clearly demonstrated in the attached "report". Personally, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that those were "factory" Remington rounds as asserted in the "report". That assertion eliminated ALL credibility for the "report" as far as I am concerned.

In conclusion, I cannot recommend the use of duplex or triplex loads. The gains realized are not worth the added hassle and all the associated hysteria, idiocy, and name-calling. That said, there is NOTHING about reloading that should be "banned" because "someone" is afraid to do it. Intelligent experimentation is the backbone of human society. Stupid people do stupid things. While there is LOTS of bullwash about how experimentation by stupid people COULD hurt someone else, the TRUTH is, it is only the extraordinarily rare occasion that an "innocent bystander" gets hurt.

Just another STUPID, DANGEROUS a$$ hole,
Paul
 
Well, I guess that makes me a "STUPID, DANGEROUS a$$ hole", as I have been developing and using duplex and triplex loads for years, and:
1) NEVER had a problem, and
2) Achieved the results I was after.

Experimenting with powder charges is dangerous for those that know nothing about what they are doing or HOW powder burns. However, "civilization as we know it" doesn't end when someone used duplex loads correctly, and not even when someone uses them incorrectly, as is clearly demonstrated in the attached "report". Personally, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that those were "factory" Remington rounds as asserted in the "report". That assertion eliminated ALL credibility for the "report" as far as I am concerned.

In conclusion, I cannot recommend the use of duplex or triplex loads. The gains realized are not worth the added hassle and all the associated hysteria, idiocy, and name-calling. That said, there is NOTHING about reloading that should be "banned" because "someone" is afraid to do it. Intelligent experimentation is the backbone of human society. Stupid people do stupid things. While there is LOTS of bullwash about how experimentation by stupid people COULD hurt someone else, the TRUTH is, it is only the extraordinarily rare occasion that an "innocent bystander" gets hurt.

Just another STUPID, DANGEROUS a$$ hole,
Paul

Well that seems to me to be a lot of words that endorse the worthless jaunt into the land of duplex loads. As for experimenting with them I would suggest that is left to the experts, preferably someone within the industry. Now I am hoping that this thread does not deteriorate into a personal insult thing, Gitano has managed to take it from a generic standpoint to calling himself stupid etc. I would suggest that is enough name calling and future debate no matter how heated, remains civil.

I can always dream :cuckoo:

John
 
Well that seems to me to be a lot of words that endorse the worthless jaunt into the land of duplex loads. As for experimenting with them I would suggest that is left to the experts, preferably someone within the industry. Now I am hoping that this thread does not deteriorate into a personal insult thing, Gitano has managed to take it from a generic standpoint to calling himself stupid etc. I would suggest that is enough name calling and future debate no matter how heated, remains civil.

I can always dream :cuckoo:

John

Now Jayb,

Just because you don't understand enough about the subject, just the same as I don't, the subject being duplex loads. That does not mean that Gitano in this case knows the same as us. I could only dream of having at my disposal the equipment that he has and his understanding of the science behind it but I am not a scientist and never pretend to be. However Gitano is one so even his handloading follows the research path. I happen to know that he has a pressure trace set up and his understanding of computing and programming is in another world when compared to mine.

Unlike some on this forum who's hand loading info I would not like to be within a couple of miles of I have happily and safely used data supplied by Gitano in developing loads for a couple of my rifles.
 
I'm guessing that Brithunter doesn't like Remingtons :D.

Correction ................... I do not like modern Remingtons and the 700 will never find house room here as I detest the cheap way they are made. However if I came across a nice Model 30S then I would be sorely tempted.

Ahhh I forgot to mention that using a few grains of a fast smokeless powder was considered quite normal to ensure clean burning of black powder in the large cases like the 577/450. Cannot recall now if I tried this or not when I was shooting the Swinburn some 25 years ago.
 
Some folks like to put a wad of kapok or polyester fluff into their cases on top of light loads of smokeless powder to keep the powder backed up against the primer. It has been a practice among shooters for years and many have taken no harm from it. It doen't mean it is still considered a recommended practice. Cast Bullet Association members determined that the practice sometimes results in a ring in the neck of a chamber where the base of the bullet resided. Some people like experimenting with duplex loads but they are still near the top of the "Do not ever Do" list from powder manufacturers.~Muir
 
JAYB said:
Gitano has managed to take it from a generic standpoint to calling himself stupid etc.

The "name calling" was a quote. It wasn't I that started that. Your "dreams" are more likely to be fulfilled when you read an entire thread and keep your criticism to those that started it. However, your relationship with Muir is well-known from this very forum, as is your 'dis-approval' of my attitude regarding cops as you are one. Again, those comments are not speculation, but based solely on what you personally have stated in this forum.

Until I am banned - no doubt I'm teetering on the edge as we speak - I will "fight" ignorance associated with firearms. Firearms are dangerous tools. So are hydraulic presses and table saws and Labrador retrievers. Every year hundreds more people are hurt using those "tools" than are hurt using firearms. Yet, firearms have a "mystique" about them. They "magically" have the ability to inflict HORRENDOUS damage if all the "priests" of firearms voodoo isn't followed to the letter. Bullwash! And I will not stand idly by and watch voodoo and "magic" REMAIN the tenets of "knowledge" about something I hold dear and KNOW is the stuff of children's boogey men.

I said it before, and I'll say it again,
I cannot recommend the use of duplex or triplex loads. The gains realized are not worth the added hassle and all the associated hysteria, idiocy, and name-calling.

If that's not caveat enough for delicate sensibilities, then take what action you feel appropriate.

Paul

PS - By the way, let me provide a QUOTE from the article posted:

Suspected Cause? “It was a combination of rifle and pistol powder. The rest of the batch was pulled and there were apparently 3-4 other rounds with mixed loads.” It has been reported that these were commercial .223 Rem reloads.
Emphasis mine.

Now please explain to me EXACTLY how THAT even SUGGESTS that the shooter was a - AND I QUOTE NOW - "STUPID, DANGEROUS a$$ hole". And since it seems necessary, I'll point out that the "stupid, dangerous, a$$ hole" comment WAS NOT MINE.

Paul
 
Last edited:
Back
Top