Remington Kleanbore primers?

[savagebrother]

being that i have a ruger no.1 converted for me by s.m.i., i have 2 breech plugs. one is there standard style and the other is made with a savage style vent liner screw. now during my testing with different loads i encountered blown primers with the s.m.i. style breech plug-not knocking it at all. they developed there style with a .50 cal. gun, mine is a .45 cal.
in looking at the s.m.i. style breech plug i think that it would be more condusive to using lighter or less powerful primers. the distance on my ruger's breech plug from primer to powder is only about .250" so the flame travel is of a considerably less distance. i am going to order the verflame kit and see what happens on my .45 cal. with the solid brass inserts and large pistol primers. now on the savage your right, long flame travel thru cold metal is not condusive to good powder ignition.
as i test i will post my findings. i hope you do too on your rifle sw.
sb

 

[SW]

I used the Rem ML primers in 60 degree temps ,no problem in 50 shots.When the temp dropped below 30*I had three miss fires in three shots ,all with deer lined up in the scope.What do you think I think of them now?Went back to the range ,two more miss fires in 6 shots in 35* temps.Changed back to winchester 209 ,no miss fires in 35 shots.

Are you referencing the SMI breechplug? If not, please go back and re-read my post as it only refered to the SMI/similiar designed plugs. I am aware of the need the Savage breechplug has of fairly hot primers.

 

[SW]

I used the Rem ML primers in 60 degree temps ,no problem in 50 shots.When the temp dropped below 30*I had three miss fires in three shots ,all with deer lined up in the scope.What do you think I think of them now?Went back to the range ,two more miss fires in 6 shots in 35* temps.Changed back to winchester 209 ,no miss fires in 35 shots.

Are you referencing SMI/similiar breechplugs or Savage breechplugs? My question/comment was about the SMI breechplug exclusively.

 

[SW]

should have been "in most, if not all, centerfire smokeless situations excessive primer energy degrades accuracy".

Do you have a single source you can cite?

The hierarchy of 209 primers established in Lyman's and other sources-- Rem., Win, Federal being the hottest. By your theory, Federal shotshells are not as accurate as Winchester, which in turn are not as accurate as Remington.

The notion of "attenuated breechplugs" requires special pleading. All 209 primers have integral flash holes, and all breech plugs attenuate the original flash hole with a flash hole of their own.

Ron Name has been smokeless muzzleloading for a long while, perhaps since the days of the Great Mojave forest. Note SMI recommended loads: http://smokelessmuzzleloading.com/loadingchart.html

All listed loads use Federal 209A primers, the hottest available. Do you thing Federal would be the ONLY listed primer if they degraded accuracy as you are trying to claim without any basis? :shock:

I was refering to centerfire rifles not shotgun shells.
Of course all breechplugs attenuate the flash, some more than others, and the Savage more than any other I've seen. The SMI likely attenuates the least of the limited # of smokeless breechplugs I've seen. And for the reason that it delivers so much more flash into the charge is why I asked the apparently innocent question IMO "would not a weaker primer possibly work better in the SMI?"
A Fed209A won't even begin to fit into my SMI 209 holder - a Win fits well and a CCIm just will make it.
I don't think I ever said that the hotter 209 degraded accuracy in a smokeless MLer;rather, I brought up the possiblilty that it might in a breechplug that "attenuates" the flame less than the Savage design does. Now, unless you've actually tested such a breechplug with smokeless powder and compared the groups why don't you quit objecting to the possibliity of such? And NO, I won't be using 4227, I quit using it quite some time before you started shooting the Savage!
I think very highly of Ron Name to say the least. I admire him and his product: yet, unless he has done accuracy and reliability testing between the various 209s what meaning does the Fed209A have(which I can't even use in my SMI) other than the obvious and that is the Fed209A will likely cause the highest pressure, he likely used it to make sure his loads were safe with even the hottest primer available.
I'm tired of this whole subject and am sorry that I ever brought up, on THIS BOARD, what I thought was a seemingly innocent question concerning the SMI.

 

[Grouse]

SW, Your questions are alway's welcome.

 

[SW]

SW, Your questions are alway's welcome.

Thanks Tom

 

[smokit]

I used the Rem ML primers in 60 degree temps ,no problem in 50 shots.When the temp dropped below 30*I had three miss fires in three shots ,all with deer lined up in the scope.What do you think I think of them now?Went back to the range ,two more miss fires in 6 shots in 35* temps.Changed back to winchester 209 ,no miss fires in 35 shots.

Are you referencing the SMI breechplug? If not, please go back and re-read my post as it only refered to the SMI/similiar designed plugs. I am aware of the need the Savage breechplug has of fairly hot primers.

No .A short Remington beech plug designed for my custom gun.

 

[SW]

No .A short Remington beech plug designed for my custom gun.

Thanks. If you don't mind, please PM me concerning its design and what you like and don't like about it. A few of us on the other board have been PMing each other/ and phone calls about the design of a breechplug for a 45 that we hope can have nearly or as much strength as the Savage breechplug yet w/o the "attenuation/fouling. We have come up with a design that may work fairly well. You are welcome to join us if you want. We would certainly welcome your input.
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

The question was and remains, and only testing will show, is that with a short straight thru, non-attenuated, breech-plug might the lower intensity 209 not work better than the hotter one. I suspect that a CCI regular or Rem 209 puts more flame into the powder charge in an SMI than a Fed209A does in a Savage.

What makes your turning of a Remington Kleenbore thread to a breechplug thread very, very hard to follow is that you originally asked no questions. There is no such thing as a "non-attenuated" breechplug as you have stated. That, injection of neck tension, cartridges, pressure, and other unrelated items is what exceeds my limited "attenuation span." Comingling unrelated items with a variety of unrelated statements, not questions, is confusing.

All you seem to be talking about is a shorter flame path, nothing further.

To answer your question, yes, I have tested a variety of experimental short flame path smokeless breech plugs with a variety of primers. 209 primer strength has had no effect on accuracy.

Whether Henry Ball's carbonless 3-piece breechplug, the breechplug I designed, or a variety of other short flame path breechplugs supplied to me will become available as either std. or as aftermarket product is unknown.

 

[SW]

The question was and remains, and only testing will show, is that with a short straight thru, non-attenuated, breech-plug might the lower intensity 209 not work better than the hotter one. I suspect that a CCI regular or Rem 209 puts more flame into the powder charge in an SMI than a Fed209A does in a Savage.

What makes your turning of a Remington Kleenbore thread to a breechplug thread very, very hard to follow is that you originally asked no questions. There is no such thing as a "non-attenuated" breechplug as you have stated. That, injection of neck tension, cartridges, pressure, and other unrelated items is what exceeds my limited "attenuation span." Comingling unrelated items with a variety of unrelated statements, not questions, is confusing.

All you seem to be talking about is a shorter flame path, nothing further.

To answer your question, yes, I have tested a variety of experimental short flame path smokeless breech plugs with a variety of primers. 209 primer strength has had no effect on accuracy.

Whether Henry Ball's carbonless 3-piece breechplug, the breechplug I designed, or a variety of other short flame path breechplugs supplied to me will become available as either std. or as aftermarket product is unknown.

Why did you wait to respond to my question for so long? Was the intent of the post that hard to determine? Why not just say " I, too, have had experience with smokeless breechplug designs that have shorter flame travel, tried various 209s and have seen no effect on accuracy"? Why does every aspect of my statement or question have to be repeatedly scrutinized and then de-meaned? A principle in finding solutions is having the freedom to explore without criticism or constant objection. You don't seem to agree with that principle either here or when you were on Doug's board. The bringing in of 4227, the use of the word attenuation, etc are not helpful. You could have so easily responded with some of what is in your last post w/o going thru all the put-downs. What I have stated here isn't meant to be mean spirited but to try to help you understand that if any new concepts or thoughts are to be explored that those who propose them need to not be continually challenged in such a way.

 

[savagebrother]

amen brother,
i hope we are here to help and to encourage each other in this great new adventure of smokeless muzzleloading. what the accuracy of shotgun shells has to do with it is a mystery to me.
the merrits of using the least amount of primer to ignite the charge is well documented by the benchrest shooters and the highpower shooters. i for one shot high power for 20 years and talked to several manufacturers. and they all told me the same thing about match primers. they are reduced in charge and weighed extremely accurately. another place to look is on doc whites site. now his testing was done with b/p and b/p substitutes but he came to the same conclusion-use the lightest primer that will reliably ignite the charge for the best accuracy. doc's been shooting these things longer than some of us have been alive.
point being is we need to listen to each other with respect and admire anyone who is willing to try something new. lets us praise each other for trying, not demean because we disagree with them. this is about having fun, not trying to one-up the other guy.
lets all have a merry christmas and a wonderful and safe new years.
God bless you all.
savagebrother

 

[Anonymous]

Why did you wait to respond to my question for so long? Was the intent of the post that hard to determine?

Yes, it was very, very hard to determine-- as you didn't originally ask anything, and dragged things a long, long way from Kleenbore primers. Most questions are followed by question marks.

I don't care what you personally shoot or try. The only thing that I object to is the unsafe practices that you have insisted on continuing such as duplex and reverse duplex loads, and disseminating ridiculous notions like SST's bouncing off of pigs, and inventing temperature sensitivity that doesn't exist.

I also object promoting of another board on this one.

Anyone who belittles others for the "Safe, Clean, & Simple" approach is really out of touch with what most folks want to do-- hunt with muzzleloaders, just as cleanly, efficiently, and effectively as possible. Too many people have been put down for merely following the rules, and using factory recommended procedures. You apparently think that is foolish-- I think it is pretty darn smart. :shock: So, yes, I object to the ridicule of others for using a muzzleloader the way it was designed to be used, when it is really the misuse of muzzleloader that deserves great disdain.

 

[Ron S]

This post is GREAT! MY Grandma told me that every day you learned a new word,your knowledge increased! Today I learned three new words! 1."non-attenuated" 2.attenuate,and 3.attenuated! I'm heading to the closet and getting my WHITE LAB COAT! (really it's my wife's) but I feel smarter with it on! These post are very good,as far as to kicking around ideas. Trying to kick each others butts,though dosen't seem to do much for the process. Any design can be improved,but as long as people close their minds to improvements,or ideas(it's the best design there is and that's it) no progress will ever be made! Being an authority on a subject means you know alot about your chosen subject. It dosen't however mean you now it all! I'm sure the engineer that designed the Ford Pinto,thought that he had designed the best compact car ever! He may have,but he also designed a rolling fire bomb in the process. Some one may come up with a better design,or they may not! But as long as everyone is happy with the current design,NO progress,or improvements will be made to that product! There are some amazing inventions,and concepts being made every day. Not all are designed by guys with Lab Coats,Degrees,Shingles,ect. Some of the simplest solutions, come from simple minds! Scary isn't it! Ron

 

[savagebrother]

nice post ron, thanks for being of an open mind.
as far as temperature sinsitivity-its always been a factor with smokeless.
theres no making things up here randy. why do you think hodgden calls there powders extreme. they worked on there formula for that very reason-temperature sensitivity!!! those of us that shoot centerfire know that a load that works at 20 degrees f. might blow your gun up at 85 degrees f. , that load you used on a coyote's might not be good for groundhogs. so there is a difference in temperature and pressures acheived with a given powder-temparature sensitivity.
with the smokeless muzzleloader, i have not found a more accurate load than in a duplex load. thousands of shots of duplex loads have been fired in savage ml-II's and if what you say were true we would be hearing about a bunch of blown guns and injured people. please refer me to any that you know of?? i think you need to talk to hornady about there light magnum cartridges-how do you think they get any extra 100 - 150 fps.
you cant cram any more powder in a cartridge than it will hold.
as for factory loads-i dont remember anyone on this board or the other telling anyone that that was a bad thing but you-you thought shooting smokeless out of a muzzleloader was crazy-i will find the thread where you, not someone else but you stated that.
your insinsitivity to the progress that we have made here shows the imature and ignorant behavior of someone suffering from a lack of self esteem. please remember some of us have been using smokeless in muzzleloaders for over 6 years now. i think we have learned a few things or two. i think if things come together right this spring i will be shooting a .323 dia. 150 grain bullet at over 3500 fps !!! who would have thought that possible 5 years ago from a muzzleloader!!! if you choose to shoot facory suggested loads and i underline suggested, have fun and i hope you get your animal . but dont you dare belittle me or anyone else who dares to walk into the unknown and see just how far we can go just because you are afraid to. and to make stements about something you yourself have not tested is truly a dangerous thing.
savagebrotheru]a real smokeless muzzleloader consultant[/u]

 

[dwhunter]

I think for those of you that want to persist in talking about Savage non approved loads and breech plugs you need to take it to the Advanced Forum. This topic has totally gone off chasing rabbits.