Savage SML Blowup with 5744

[52Bore]

Agree with both of you.

I did look up Bill and read a nice article RW had with him. Also, learned that APP is Jim Shockey's stuff.

BP burns at a continuous and faster rate, that is why we have different F granulation. We know 4F is the fastest burning because and has the smallest amount of surface area (and size) with each grain, therefor each grains burns up quicker compared to 1F.
Smokeless is progressive and dependent on each other grain to generate and accelerate burn, that's why the more of it and pressure it has the better it perform (cartridge - no problem with ignition). I think this might be the root cause of why we're seeing some ignition issues with it and BH209 in a ML. Without the interference fit of the bullet/sabot, that is where the problem lies (I believe).
1) Because of the rare instance it does not ignite, the force of the 209 primer will move the bullet. (We all have agreed that all ML maker state bullet off powder can cause the barrel to burst). But, since (I THINK - big, I THINK) the previous #11 and BP and subs users are NOT used to or ever experienced a bullet moving. Then they experience this non-ignition with smokeless, they just re-prime and fire another without knowing the bullet has moved off the powder.
2) The guys who see the bullet exit 20', reload WITHOUT realizing they have just double charged. 40gr of 5744 in a 50 cal bore is how long? 3/4"? - would a novice notice this?
I think I kind of stated this previously, sorry for repeating.
I think the double loader is too easy an answer (read my #3 from yesterday if you doubt it) and I will agree it can occur.

Thank you all for your thoughts and patience.

 

[52Bore]

bestill:
read the 'ignition section #5' section you mentioned.
Goes back to what I previously said about solving the ignition problem with just making it ignite easier - it should ignite EVERY-TIME. There is no compromising with safety in a firearm - they are dealing with the general public - SHAME on Western Powder for recommending in a ML.

 

[52Bore]

That make me sick - if it the same for them with 5744 our whatever smokeless they may recommend in a ML - people should be suing them and not Savage!

 

[cljohnson24]

Agree with both of you.

I did look up Bill and read a nice article RW had with him. Also, learned that APP is Jim Shockey's stuff.

BP burns at a continuous and faster rate, that is why we have different F granulation. We know 4F is the fastest burning because and has the smallest amount of surface area (and size) with each grain, therefor each grains burns up quicker compared to 1F.
Smokeless is progressive and dependent on each other grain to generate and accelerate burn, that's why the more of it and pressure it has the better it perform (cartridge - no problem with ignition). I think this might be the root cause of why we're seeing some ignition issues with it and BH209 in a ML. Without the interference fit of the bullet/sabot, that is where the problem lies (I believe).
1) Because of the rare instance it does not ignite, the force of the 209 primer will move the bullet. (We all have agreed that all ML maker state bullet off powder can cause the barrel to burst). But, since (I THINK - big, I THINK) the previous #11 and BP and subs users are NOT used to or ever experienced a bullet moving. Then they experience this non-ignition with smokeless, they just re-prime and fire another without knowing the bullet has moved off the powder.
2) The guys who see the bullet exit 20', reload WITHOUT realizing they have just double charged. 40gr of 5744 in a 50 cal bore is how long? 3/4"? - would a novice notice this?
I think I kind of stated this previously, sorry for repeating.
I think the double loader is too easy an answer (read my #3 from yesterday if you doubt it) and I will agree it can occur.

Thank you all for your thoughts and patience.

Nobody is disputing that you can get away with a "double load" using BH209, Pellets and other subs. Smokeless loads are a step up in performance and all the inherent "added" risks of potential danger are outlined in the manual that came with the product. IF an individual doesn't feel he has the ability to use safely...he has the flexibility to use one of the "fool proof" BP Sub loads rather than smokeless.

Should the makers of Nitrous Oxide Systems, Blowers, Turbos be responsible when accidents happen?
Treestand mfg's probably have a record amount of lawsuits each and every year...yet almost every one of those lawsuits are successfully defended upon the premise that the Plaintiff didn't follow the owners manual and wear his safety harness correctly.

Are smokeless for the general population? I think the statistics show there are very very few "blow ups" out there (and IMHO ALL were "user error")given the volume of 10ML's sold.

Just my opinion, but these "blow ups" get so much attention and remain in circulation for so long it simply made it cost ineffective for Savage to continue to sell the 10ML. Declining sales from paranoid internet readers put the "kabosh" on the 10ml...not payouts of legal settlements

 

[bestill]

bestill:
read the 'ignition section #5' section you mentioned.
Goes back to what I previously said about solving the ignition problem with just making it ignite easier - it should ignite EVERY-TIME. There is no compromising with safety in a firearm - they are dealing with the general public - SHAME on Western Powder for recommending in a ML.

Realistically could that statement be made with anything we use on daily basis.

I have used 30 plus pounds of blackhorn powder in Muzzleloader and never once did it not perform as intended.. Have i had some ignition problem yes and only when testing a load outside of western powders clearly stated guidelines.

As most anything used properly perfectly safe.
Step outside of recommendations your gambling.

 

[long shot]

ACTUALLY ALL THROUGH THIS DISCUSSION NOT ONE PERSON HAS EVER BOTHERED TO WANT TO KNOW OR FIND A SOLUTION ALL YOU WANT TO DO IT SEEMS IS JUST DEFEND WHETHER YOU ARE USING SML , 209BH , OR BLACK. i STILL THINK THERE HAS TO BE A REASON THE POWDER DOESN'T IGNITE LIKE IT IS SUPPOSED TO. i READ WHAT THEY SAID ABOUT SEATING THE POWDER AND I ASSUME BESTILL YOU DID ALSO. THE REASON IS STATED BY SAVAGE IN THEIR MANUAL. 52 BORE DIDN'T MAKE IT UP. YES IT IS REASONABLE IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF THINGS. SO DO WE CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION TO KEEP ON SEEING WHO GETS LAST WORD? ITS NOT ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE DONE WITH IT BUT AVERAGE PERSON. PEOPLE OF THIS SIGHT SHOULD ACTUALLY WANT OR DEMAND O KNOW WHY IT FAILS TO BURN AND BULLET FIRMLY SEATED SHOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH INITIAL IGNITION SHOULD IGNITE ANY WAY. MAYBE NO VELOCITY BUT SHOULD BURN. NOW TELL ME THAT IS WRONG. I'M DONE ARGUING ABOUT IT. YOU ARE BY NO MEANS AN EXPERT. EXPERIENCED YES.

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

Which powder doesn't ignite like its suppose to?

(Side note, all caps are hard to read)

 

[bestill]

Im not after last word and you are correct im no expert..
When dealing with smokeless powder bullet seating and load resistance definitely have effect on powder performance..
There's plenty of smokeless powder that ignite extremely easy but they are very fine grain and burn very fast. Not a good choice for larger caliber guns with heavy bullets..
So by design powders being used in smokeless Muzzleloader are typically larger grain powder with slower burn rate and that is done with the addition of retardants which makes harder to get optimal burn rate. So you need a snug bullet to create pressure and heat.

Kinda similar to ffffg blackpowder very easy to ignite but extremely fast.
Fg is harder to ignite and slower for large caliber heavy bullet.

Im not defending nothing thread was started and only sharing my understanding on the topic..
And learn from other post..

Fivebull,

I loaded my Muzzleloader with. 80 gr of blackhorn and a very loose275 be with wad.
And shot it into a bucket with lid muzzle inside of bucket.. primer ignited and expelled bullet into bucket. Was only able to recover 62 grain of powder. Patched out bore no powder left in gun.
So some powder did burn.
Reloaded gun with proper bullet fit and boom just as supposed..

 

[7mmfreak]

To the all caps guy, here are some answers and the solution:

1. The powder not igniting comes to powder choice in my opinion; right tool for the job. You don't load RL22 in .223 Rem or IMR4227 in a .338 Lapua. There are better powder choices than what was used. Some don't ignite easily, some are overly sensitive to temp variances, some can get "peaky" when compressed (like H4895), or get "peaky" really fast when they are near max (like 8208-XBR). 5744 is a powder that does not produce great performance when used in this application. It is totally possible to apply flame to a smokeless propellant without igniting it or just partially igniting it. It might have happened that way, expelled the bullet with sabot but not all powder, then he charged it again and big bomb go boom. Who knows. Another more suitable powder might have prevented this.

2. Nobody KNOWS what happened in that barrel. The solution is anal retentive attention to detail. It is difficult to double charge a lot of metallic cartridges. It is entirely possible to double charge a muzzle-loader. The only way to prevent this (the solution) is to have a system like bestill's loading block so that you can prevent accidents. Or you put charges in one bag, bullets in another, primers in yet another, and pull one of each out and place them together so that they get used, expended, and accounted for. You witness mark ramrods. You perform your due diligence or you lose digits, eyes, your life, etc.

 

[HighTechRedneck]

I did not take the time to read everyone elses posts, so I have no idea if this has been pointed out already or not. There is NO way that the powder would ignite without a bullet in the barrel. Pressures would be far too low for any ignition at all.

Also you said that the bullet flew out without igniting the powder in the original charges that led up to the explosion. That means that they were attempting to use a bullet/sabot combo that won't work. The bullet/sabot loaded too lose for powder ignition. If it aint tight enough when you shove it down the barrel just won't go boom.

 

[52Bore]

Interesting graph on various pressures from BH209 website, ignore my highlights while I was reading the printout.
All with same charge, but too bad they don't say or include any of the actual data represented on the graph.
At least it shows 5744 - nearly 3-7x more pressure than that of any BP or sub.

 

[GM54-120]

Gee, if you want real pressure traces for 5744 in a Savage 50cal why not look on dougs board. There are a bunch and they are hardly 3-7 times higher pressure when using Savage recommended loads. Savage even includes the Lee dipper for volumetric measuring.

BTW did you call William Ball yet? Probably not huh?

 

[Squeeze]

there is no great mystery here. Ray Charles could see its faulty loading practices. The guy wont admit, or doesnt remember the whole story. Keep it clean, load it correctly. It goes off every time. Dont swab out the oil, let the carbon build, poorly fit or seated bullet, = problems. You have problems and think the solution is pouring powder down the bore? Well, there you go, problems...

 

[long shot]

some should read post on Doug message board, about misfires, seems it moved his bullet up barrel. Found it in front of him, durng this thread i believe it was said it couldn't happen. Just saying fellows Post on Dougs was about 12/17 by Nateknight

 

[52Bore]

GM 54-120:
Haven't called Bob Ball yet, the past few weeks with the holidays have been busy and gone quickly, plus that work thing keeps getting in the way.
Who knows why Blackhorn didn't post any data on the graph. I'm surprised, since your a Moderator on this site you are referring more accurate information posted by Jon Doe on another site over this graph from Western Powders (Blackhorn209). Regardless of any data, their bar graph clearly shows 3-7x peak pressure, depending on what powder your comparing against 5477.

 

[GM54-120]

The pressure trace data posted on dougs board is clearly labeled who did the trace and the equipment involved. He is a current member there. You wanted to talk to people extremely familiar with the Savage yet you wont go there and talk to those with over 10 years of SML load data experience. They have far more active SML shooters than here and some well known builders are members too.

Im beginning to wonder why not.

 

[52Bore]

Time and I really don't care to put myself thru more of the same..
Western Powder (BH209) data is good enough for me.

 

[52Bore]

If load in cartridge is to lite and falls away from primer it causes excessive pressure spikes and can blow. They claim it basically detonates instead of burning. go to http://www.reloadammo.com/liteload I know people think I'm stupid but could this happen in a smokless load of a Muzzle loading barrel

Fivebull: Good call a few weeks back as some else might think so. I believe what you referred to is called S.E.E. (secondary explosion effect). I only know this as I received a call from Alan S. the new NMLRA President late today.. Tom S. sent him my original email discussion from the local Savage accident. He gave me the explanation and I've just read a little this evening - no more 4198 NfB loads for me in my original BPE rifles (what little I did).
Another phenomenon as it seems it has occurred mostly in large cases with low powder charges of slow burning smokeless powders. The primer blows the flame across powder laying low in a large case, it doesn't burn - it just explodes. Very rare and powder companies have not been able to repeatedly duplicate, but was first documented in 1881 by Dr. Mann in the Bullets Flight from Powder to Target. I have the book and recall it being difficult to read...
He questioned whether the powder spread across the bottom of the bore near the breech just detonated when the 209 primer blew across, igniting the fine particles inside the bore to help assist the powder with nothing less than detonation?
Wow, this is certainly a different thought..

 

[Grouse]

I think in most cases, the savages have been blown up on purpose. And I think one person won't mention a name was the ring leader. I'm sure there are exceptions but I think most are pre staged myself. This is my opinion and I'm sticking with it after watching all this for many years.

 

[52Bore]

Grouse:
Doubt anyone would purposely get behind a known potential BOMB.
I think I've read where TB had one blow; certainly a questionable reason- gas cutting.

I give kudos to the new NMRLA president for his observation on this accident. From our conversation, he probably has more experience/common sense than anyone in the ML industry.
I asked him to continue support the In-line matches by soliciting ALL the modern ML manufactures at the SHOT show to sponsor a rifle for donating during the April In-line match - we'll see how many step up.