Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: A cautionary tale - lucky man

  1. #1

  2. #2
    going to take more than a light clean and oil to sort that one out

  3. #3
    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?

  4. #4
    Established Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tokoroa, South Waikato,NZ
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by bewsher500 View Post
    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.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by bewsher500 View Post
    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

  6. #6
    [QUOTE]]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!

  7. #7
    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

  8. #8
    A little bit of spit & polish and that rifle will look as good as new

  9. #9
    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

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Brithunter View Post
    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
    Gottcha! I'm still stuck on that short action thing as well...~Muir

Similar Threads

  1. Scotsman, shootin man, doggy man, good pint man!
    By parlanaich in forum Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27-08-2010, 15:00
  2. cautionary anecdote re ballistic tips
    By pete evans in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 29-08-2009, 21:22
  3. cautionary note.
    By swampy in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-2008, 23:12
  4. cautionary tale
    By 243varmint in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 24-06-2008, 07:20
  5. Hearing Loss – A cautionary tale
    By 325wsm in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 17-05-2008, 20:01

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •