Cowboy Small Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I was shooting today at our monthly match. My Rossi '92 had unburned powder flakes inside the receiver and on the bolt face. I load 38 special with a light charge of Clays powder. It was cold this morning (mid 40's) I notice some and somebody suggested that I may have had a split case....seemed plausible but found even more powder after the next stage and even more after the next. Me and a pard both load together (same load/bullets/powder charge) and both shoot '92s. His didn't do this at all today. He was shooting in the same temps I was. Any ideas what may be happening and/or solutions? Thanks in advance Cowboy Small Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scout Sonnor Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 It could just be blowback. Cases "fireform" when the round discharges, but if the charge is too light, the case won't expand to seal the chamber. Just one possibility... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangler Jones, SASS # 64178 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Maybe his loads had a tighter crimp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiowa Kid, SASS #69870L Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Maybe his loads had a tighter crimp. +1 kk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Sgt. Jake McCandless #3368 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Cowboy Small You diagnosed your problem here (I load 38 special with a light charge of Clays powder. It was cold this morning (mid 40's). Clays when loaded at minimum or lower does not perform well in cooler temps. You might up the charge slightly above minimum,I suggest mid way between min. and max. or better yet look at a different powder in cooler weather. Adios Sgt. Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 +1 kk Uh, no...two folks were shooting the exact some rounds...they load their rounds together and split the rounds between them. The rounds are loaded light...but still pushing 700fps at least outta 5.5" bbl. And again, the unburnt powder only showed up on one of the 2 92's. So it's not the powder charge nor the crimp...nor blowback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.T Chambers, SASS#76185 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 more after the next. Me and a pard both load together (same load/bullets/powder charge) ... Cowboy Small You didn't mention primers CS, are you both using the same brand/type of primers? MTC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 You didn't mention primers CS, are you both using the same brand/type of primers? MTC They are using all the same components...they sit around and load together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patagonia Pete Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Just curious ... Do both of these 92s have the same length barrel?? Are both of these 92s of approximately the same vintage (ie: both late models with the safety on the bolt and dovetailed front sight ... etc ... etc ... or not ...). Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Small Posted December 18, 2011 Author Share Posted December 18, 2011 Just curious ... Do both of these 92s have the same length barrel?? Are both of these 92s of approximately the same vintage (ie: both late models with the safety on the bolt and dovetailed front sight ... etc ... etc ... or not ...). Pete No, mine is well used (pre safety)and his is very new....otherwise the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Small Posted December 18, 2011 Author Share Posted December 18, 2011 Uh, no...two folks were shooting the exact some rounds...they load their rounds together and split the rounds between them. The rounds are loaded light...but still pushing 700fps at least outta 5.5" bbl. And again, the unburnt powder only showed up on one of the 2 92's. So it's not the powder charge nor the crimp...nor blowback. Who arte thou so knowledged in the ways of science? 50 bucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Just curious ... Do both of these 92s have the same length barrel?? Are both of these 92s of approximately the same vintage (ie: both late models with the safety on the bolt and dovetailed front sight ... etc ... etc ... or not ...). Pete Do you suspect that differences could lead to different burn efficiencies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Who arte thou so knowledged in the ways of science? 50 bucks? I've tested yer loads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patagonia Pete Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Do you suspect that differences could lead to different burn efficiencies? Yes ... I think that is what they are seeing. The chamber size would never be exactly equal ... being of different vintage would open the possibility of it being a bigger difference than just machining variance. Heck ... these guys are shooting 38s and these rifles are chambered for 357 ... so who has the biggest carbon buildup in front of the rounds (in the front of the chamber). IMHO ... the load is on the edge ... (as stated a light load) ... it is cold ... and they are just touching the edge of enough effiency to get a complete burn and we are seeing the one that creates the least chamber pressure (or has less burn time with a shorter barrel etc)and leaves some flakes untouched. I have a pair of Pietta revolvers and one has about twice the barrel/cylinder clearance than the other and will show exactly the same behavior (at least they did at a time when I was searching for my ultimate "lightest load ever" ... for 45s). I ended up loading hot enough to make them both happy (most of the time). They were 4 3/4 inch and loads that were just too light for them (like going high primer when shooting "downhill" at a target) ... would work fine in a 5 1/2 inch gun. Don't think this is a biggie in any case ... Putting both on a chrono with the same loads would verify the difference between the two guns (bet the guy that ends up with the lowest reading is the one leaving the unburnt powder when it gets cold out ... /w this load). Anyhow ... as I said ... IMHO ... Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEAD BANE, SASS 70197 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Ones chamber may be slightly larger than the others. What will swell and seal one may not the other. Try a little more powder, may fix it, may not. I dont like clays, but thats irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cinch, SASS#29433 Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I bet if ya look at the table where the guns are staged there is unburned Clays there too. Clays is position sensitive so oft times the 1st shot burns really weird as the primer flash is above the powder in the case, then the recoil moves the powder back and the primer lights it better I have shot Clays when it was -15 and Boston John Doucette (RIP) was straddled over the fire we had built and were spotting from in a black frock coat and new shiny Dan Posts. Lots of clays everywhere that day as it is temp sensitive especially in bigger cases. It won't hurt anything to have the granules around but if it really bothers ya pick up your guns and point the muzzle skyward prior to shooting, or switch to TB when it gets cold!! It's not the chamber or the ammo in this case, it could be the way the shooter picks up his rifle. If ya chamber 20 barrels in a day the reamer will be fatter in the morning than it is in the evening... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Sounds more like an ammo to gun situation rather than the gun itself. GG... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go West Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 My bet is on a larger chamber in the one with excessive unburned flakes. I would suggest a hotter round or a powder with less cold sensitivity. You may even get more hits with spotters who rely more on their ears at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Joe West, SASS#1532 L Regulator Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 Headspace, some 92's have loose headspace from wear or overpolished locking links, or some just have looser fitted bolts. Chamber dimensions, they vary. Just got a bad round. Maybe one guy keeps his ammo warm in his pocket and the other doesn't. If you can't check the headspace [it's easy though] or measure the chamber: Chrono same batch of rounds from both guns and see if the average gives a clue. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I load 38 special with a light charge of Clays powder. Need a powder with a faster burn rate, like Bullseye or Red Dot with the minimum powder charge and a tight crimp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Folks, the load is a light load...like most folks use when engaging steel targets. OY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Small Posted December 19, 2011 Author Share Posted December 19, 2011 Hey fellers, Thanks for the thoughts, suggestions and time. Gonna try a little more powder for the winter and see what happens. Winters can last for hours around here. Vaya Con Dios Cowboy Small Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Folks, the load is a light load...like most folks use when engaging steel targets. Phantom, I have to agree with you. Am always reading posts on the Wire for 'light this' and 'light that' ... but there is never a number behind the word light! IMO it's because nearly all the folks don't know what the 'light' number is or what they want both in fps or trigger pull Heck, if I was a smokeless powder shooter, there is a Bullseye 250gr Colt recipe in Propellent Powders that chronographs at 661 fps v 842 fps or greater. But I enjoy black powder 250gr loads in the 800 fps range to engage steel targets. Let me repeat again - Need a powder with a faster burn rate, like Bullseye or Red Dot with the minimum powder charge and a tight crimp There's also in Propellent Powders a 38 Spl recipe for Bullseye at 734 fps. Is that a light or heavy load for most 38 Spl folks engaging steel targets? Might add: my definition of a tight crimp is it takes 8-10 whacks with a kinetic puller to dislodge the bullet. A light crimp is 2-4 whacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang Gregg Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Firing .38 Specials in the longer .357 Mag chamber is gonna left some debris in the chamber itself. Maybe some of the unburnt crap is falling into the guts. We shoot .44 Specials in .44 Mag M-1892's and Marlins. We still get stuff in there actions more than I like. I'd try a tighter crimp too. And faster powder may burn cleaner, if'n you wanna mess with that route. Mustang Gregg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Ron Wayne Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 My bet is on a larger chamber in the one with excessive unburned flakes. I would suggest a hotter round or a powder with less cold sensitivity. You may even get more hits with spotters who rely more on their ears at times. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Two Feathers, SASS #58400 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Ones chamber may be slightly larger than the others. What will swell and seal one may not the other. Try a little more powder, may fix it, may not. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate Kiowa Jones #6765 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Way too many variable to blame the gun. The simple fix is to just bump the load up some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adirondack Jack, SASS #53440 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Hint, to limit blowby with smokeless, avoid cleaning the chamber unless you have feeding issues. A little fouling build-up will act as a gasket to limit blowby. If yer pard hasn't cleaned his guns (other than wiping em off) in ages, there's yer difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Dan Troop 70448 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Going to go out on a limb on this, because I haven't seen your Rossi, nor any work you may have done. But a friend, a non CAS, yet has several Rossi's. He slicked them up himself to get them to operate smoother. On the locking bolts, he took some metal off the front faces, to his way of thinking it would help slide into the bolt smoother. This also changed his head space, with each shot fired, blowback was sending unburned powder back into the rifle. We switched bolts out from another rifle, he had no further problems of unburned powder coming into the frame and guts. MT Or you may have some wear on the locking bolts, or the bolt were the locking bolts come into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockridge,SASS #8763 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Friends, There is a reason that all the original Winchester cartridges after the .44 Henry were bottlenecks. And this is it. The Winchester engineers were in their own way geniuses they realised that straight wall cases with BP loads didn't seal well in their chambers, the thin bottlenecks they designed did. Take a Winchester or Marlin Rifle with a straight case (.45 Colt, 44 Mag, 357, whatever) and shoot a match. Then take a Winchester or Marlin rifle in 32wcf, 38wcf, 44wcf, etc with a full case of BP and shoot a match. At the end of the day see how much crap is in the action and you have the answer to the question. The same applies to light to moderate smokeless loads in straight wall cases. Especially with much stronger modern brass. By the way, it's highly likely that this is why there were never any original '73 Winchesters in 45 by god Colt. That and the small rim size with the weak folded case heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 I was shooting today at our monthly match. My Rossi '92 had unburned powder flakes inside the receiver and on the bolt face. I load 38 special with a light charge of Clays powder. It was cold this morning (mid 40's) I notice some and somebody suggested that I may have had a split case....seemed plausible but found even more powder after the next stage and even more after the next. Me and a pard both load together (same load/bullets/powder charge) and both shoot '92s. His didn't do this at all today. He was shooting in the same temps I was. Any ideas what may be happening and/or solutions? Thanks in advance Cowboy Small Yea Rossi's suck! That's the problem. I have one in .44-40 and it's an absolute awful rifle. It cycles fine after I slicked it up but it's a worthless peice of crap for cas! Now that's just MHO! Rye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabez Cowboy,SASS # 50129 Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Don't seem to have a problem with "Blow-by" in my .45 Colt loads using either smokeless or Black !!!! then I'm running 250 grainers out the muzzle at between 1,234 and 1,260 fps. depending on if I'm using my 20 incher or my 24 incher ... Then again I didn't have any "blow-by" problems when I test fired Orignal .45 colts rounds made before 1900 in my rifles ,,,,, and I didn't have any feed or ejection problems either when I ran them through my 66 and my 92 .... I personally don't buy into the idea that that is why rifles weren't chambered in .45 colts in the Day ... Jabez Cowboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crotchety Old Grouch, SASS #51188 Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Yea Rossi's suck! That's the problem. I have one in .44-40 and it's an absolute awful rifle. It cycles fine after I slicked it up but it's a worthless peice of crap for cas! Now that's just MHO! Rye Give ya fifty bucks for it and I'll even pay the postage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Smokepole #29248L Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 It aint a problem with your '92. It's a too light of a loading problem. Up the powder charge a mite and make sure that you have a good crimp. Minimum loads at warm weather can turn into squibs when it gets cold.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom, SASS #54973 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 It aint a problem with your '92. It's a too light of a loading problem. Up the powder charge a mite and make sure that you have a good crimp. Minimum loads at warm weather can turn into squibs when it gets cold.... How easy it is to blame light loads (note: NOT "Minimum" loads!)...please read the thread. A Batch of loads were made and shared... Oh nevermind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.