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?
]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 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!
Not sure about the 260 and 7-08 reference....~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
count me in as anotherAhhh 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
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
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
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 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
John
I'm guessing that Brithunter doesn't like Remingtons .
JAYB said:Gitano has managed to take it from a generic standpoint to calling himself stupid etc.
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.
Emphasis mine.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.