Benchrest rifle Questions.... trigger at 3 onces..... Gee! hair trigger.........

[alinwa]

There is one factor here that needs to be brought up. Those of us who post are not the only readers here. I have had a lot of experience teaching people various things, and I can guarantee you that what someone who has a different amount of experience hears may be quite different from what you may have actually said. For that reason I try to avoid talking about things that are at all marginal if some detail is not handled correctly. If you want to learn more about this, after explaining how something is done to someone who has not done it before, ask him to repeat the procedure that he has assured you he understands. You may be surprised by what he says.

Boyd I think you know that I of all people have learned this and I COMPLETELY agree with you but again....... can you see ANY SCENARIO where an easily chambered round could produce one of those feared "pressure spikes?"


These two terms;

"Into or near the lands" and

"too little neck clearance"


absolutely define the knee-jerk "DANGER!" when in fact REAL danger issues (two types of powder in the same room, not emptying powder hoppers, leaving powder in unmarked containers, making "little changes" or assumptions re "burning rate" etc etc) are often ignored, NOT jumped on.

I call this syndrome "deadly mis-direction" and it's something I fight daily in my work, the tendency to harp on (or even "outlaw") certain practices which ARE NOT inherently dangerous and missing the real point.

I remember (was actually involved) when Bill Ruger got embroiled in his "trigger failure" lawsuits and am quite aware of this latest Remington debacle...... now, were either of these things actually TRIGGER issues?

Again, I'll backscuttle like a crawdad if anyone can produce a plausible scenario wherein clearances can cause danger........ in this light, another DANGER! DANGER! scrawl is "Excess Headspace"...... you bring that up and 50 well-meaning guys will clear their collective throats...... with nary a ONE explanation of how it can possibly be dangerous.

Driving to church is dangerous.

Taking a shower is dangerous.

Working with tight rounds is DANGEROUS because having hysteresis built into the system can act to mask the very real dangers of crimping.

I fail to see how chambering loose rounds can be dangerous except for of course the dangers of repeated reloading and over-sizing which WILL HAPPEN with factory dies..... nearly always.

 

[Boyd Allen]

Well, since you asked, there is always the SEE, then there are cases that measure correctly for OAL but have necks that are too long causing crimping on the bullet as they are chambered. This can be caused by repeatedly firing very mild loads in a rimless case that has a smaller shoulder angle and relatively thin and or soft brass in that area.

Funny story, I was shooting a tight neck .222 with relatively close neck clearance using Sierra bullets.
The next trip to the range I had cleaned my case necks and was trying out some custom Outback bullets. The first firing the rounds chambered normally. I fired the cases, and reloaded them with a slight brushing that just dusted out the necks. When I tried to chamber them the bolt stopped short by a quarter of an inch or so. Curious, I applied a little pressure to the back of the shroud with my thumb, and was able to close the bolt. Opening it again and examining the case, I saw a bright ring around the neck over the bullet's pressure ring that had not been there before. I concluded the thickness of the powder fouling from one firing on the inside of the neck increased its thickness enough to go from a slip fit to one that interfered in the narrow area over the bullet's pressure ring. I was not shooting a fast powder, and the rounds fired with no problem. Later I carefully measured the pressure ring of one of the Outback bullets. It was.225. The Sierras had no pressure ring and measured .224. I think that one reason that I did not have a problem is that starting a short bullet is not as much of an issue as a long one, and that the powder was on the slow side for the caliber bullet combination, 748. If the load had been a hot one with heavier bullet and a faster powder, perhaps a faster ball powder that was at the edge of its linear pressure response range, the result might have been different. I had seen what pushing the envelop with something like reloader 7 could produce. In any case, since then I have the words of several top shooters that running that close was not as consistently accurate as something north of .002 for a .22 or 6mm. OK I lied. Looking back the story is not funny, but perhaps there was some useful information there.

 

[alinwa]

Well, since you asked, there is always the SEE, then there are cases that measure correctly for OAL but have necks that are too long causing crimping on the bullet as they are chambered. This can be caused by repeatedly firing very mild loads in a rimless case that has a smaller shoulder angle and relatively thin and or soft brass in that area.

Funny story, I was shooting a tight neck .222 with relatively close neck clearance using Sierra bullets.
The next trip to the range I had cleaned my case necks and was trying out some custom Outback bullets. The first firing the rounds chambered normally. I fired the cases, and reloaded them with a slight brushing that just dusted out the necks. When I tried to chamber them the bolt stopped short by a quarter of an inch or so. Curious, I applied a little pressure to the back of the shroud with my thumb, and was able to close the bolt. Opening it again and examining the case, I saw a bright ring around the neck over the bullet's pressure ring that had not been there before. I concluded the thickness of the powder fouling from one firing on the inside of the neck increased its thickness enough to go from a slip fit to one that interfered in the narrow area over the bullet's pressure ring. I was not shooting a fast powder, and the rounds fired with no problem. Later I carefully measured the pressure ring of one of the Outback bullets. It was.225. The Sierras had no pressure ring and measured .224. I think that one reason that I did not have a problem is that starting a short bullet is not as much of an issue as a long one, and that the powder was on the slow side for the caliber bullet combination, 748. If the load had been a hot one with heavier bullet and a faster powder, perhaps a faster ball powder that was at the edge of its linear pressure response range, the result might have been different. I had seen what pushing the envelop with something like reloader 7 could produce. In any case, since then I have the words of several top shooters that running that close was not as consistently accurate as something north of .002 for a .22 or 6mm. OK I lied. Looking back the story is not funny, but perhaps there was some useful information there.

OK....


This makes my point soundly.

You actually fired rounds which were interference fit on the pressure ring. And it was not dangerous.

Yet you qualify with "not funny" which implies "it could have been".....

right?

ALL'S I'm saying is..... I can't live like that.

So I test stuff.....I've tested it.

So I don't have to qualify.

 

[Boyd Allen]

OK....


This makes my point soundly.

You actually fired rounds which were interference fit on the pressure ring. And it was not dangerous.

Yet you qualify with "not funny" which implies "it could have been".....

right?

ALL'S I'm saying is..... I can't live like that.

So I test stuff.....I've tested it.

So I don't have to qualify.

Al,
Tests are valid for the conditions of the test, but if you read carefully, I said that if the conditions had been different, I would have expected different results. My point is that just because we have not had a problem with some combinations does not mean that there is no issue with others. Over generalization can be misleading, and in this case potentially dangerous. A friend ran into pressure signs under a specific set of conditions because of what seems to be more than average neck tension combined with a fast powder, and a load that was near the limit. If he had not had all of that come together at the same time, he would probably not have seen that. Unless you specify all of the details of your test, so that others can judge whether their situations are similar, someone might draw the wrong conclusion....by over generalizing.

 

[alinwa]

Al,
Tests are valid for the conditions of the test, but if you read carefully, I said that if the conditions had been different, I would have expected different results. My point is that just because we have not had a problem with some combinations does not mean that there is no issue with others. Over generalization can be misleading, and in this case potentially dangerous. A friend ran into pressure signs under a specific set of conditions because of what seems to be more than average neck tension combined with a fast powder, and a load that was near the limit. If he had not had all of that come together at the same time, he would probably not have seen that. Unless you specify all of the details of your test, so that others can judge whether their situations are similar, someone might draw the wrong conclusion....by over generalizing.

Well, since we're here..... ...... and it's me who's "over generalizing" please. Be specific.

Please map out one scenario where a fellow with a new Bench Rest Rifle can get in trouble where he's easily chambering his rounds.

I'm being accused of promoting unsafe behaviour. I'm a licensed Safety Instructor in several fields and a licensed reloader.

But MORE than that, I AM a Safety Geek! I do not knowingly promote unsafe behaviour.

I'm not taking this lightly.

When a man comes on here asking for advice and I involve myself I take complete responsibility for every word I post so now that you and Uthink are here to tell it like it is please proceed. I'll back on out and let ya's help the man.

 

[alinwa]

Well, since you asked, there is always the SEE, then there are cases that measure correctly for OAL but have necks that are too long..........

.

OK Boyd..... I need another favor and I promise I won't keep arguing and messing you guys' thread. Wilbur's kicked me outta' the room enough times.

WHAT is a SEE??

You're just wayy over my paygrade with everything you've said above as regards "rounds chambering easily/normally/loosely" as in no untoward resistance.

To me a SEE is a body of water.... but I'm perty iggerunt when the akkernyms start flyin'....

 

[dmort]

Not bad....looks like you appreciate history. One of my favorite subjects.