Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Ammunition-Gunsmithing > Reloading
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-24-2009, 01:32 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 40
Liked 350 Times in 87 Posts
Default .357 Magnum 125 grain bullets and Blue Dot....

Someone posted here not long ago that thier reloading manual contained a warning advising against loading .357 Magnum 125 grain jacketed bullets with Blue Dot powder. They didn't say what the warning entailed.

Any one else hear of such a warning? I have about 150 rounds of 125 grain jacketed bullets, loaded with 12.5 grains Blue Dot that I assembled in 2004 or so. I quit shooting them in my Model 66 upon hearing warnings against shooting 125 grainers in K frame revolvers, but was thinking of running them through my Marlin 1894 rifle.

My Speer reloading manual listed this load, with 13.0 grains Blue Dot being the max reccomended for 125 grain jacketed bullets. According to the manual, 12.5 grains should give 1300 FPS or so....
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-24-2009, 02:14 PM
snw19_357's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: N.AZ
Posts: 2,984
Likes: 34
Liked 413 Times in 181 Posts
Default

I received this last year.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-24-2009, 02:44 PM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 40
Liked 350 Times in 87 Posts
Default

Wow! Thanks for the heads up. Now I guess I have to pull about 150 .357 loads...

I'm glad I haven't been shooting them!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-24-2009, 09:54 PM
geoff40's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 112
Liked 519 Times in 193 Posts
Default

From the day I first saw this, something about this warning stinks. I have no stake in this and I've never loaded 125s with Blue Dot (loaded some heavier stuff though). I just plain don't see any logic in why 1 bullet weight would be dangerous but not lighter or heavier bullets of the same cartridge. I think somebody at Alliant is full of - - - -, or that behind this warning is some litigation on an event we'll never hear about.
__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-24-2009, 11:06 PM
Bib's Avatar
Bib Bib is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: McKees Rocks Pa.
Posts: 343
Likes: 234
Liked 191 Times in 71 Posts
Default

Way back 20+ years ago when I began handloading I remember reading an article by one of the gunwriters (can't remember which one) where he stated that he had damage to a handgun using Blue Dot. He had weighed each charge and said that he would never use it again. Since I was just starting out I figured I would avoid that powder and still do to this day.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-25-2009, 12:29 AM
Paul5388's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rusk Co. Texas
Posts: 1,326
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Default

I would have to say the warning is highly unusual. It's hard to convince me there is a problem with one bullet weight in .357 Mag and all .41 Mags and nothing else has been affected.

I would also think there would be lot numbers that are recalled if the problem exists in recent production. Powder from 2004 should have exhibited problems long ago or people have been using a potentially dangerous product for 5 years without knowing it.

It all does nothing to instill confidence in Alliant's products or their addressing the situation in a timely manner. That's just like their failure to warn of the propensity of Blue Dot to exhibit high pressure problems when the ambient temperatures get lower than 0 degrees F. That was confirmed by a phone call where I specifically asked about how low the temperature needs to get for the problem to arise.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:06 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: \'ell if I know
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Liked 215 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
I think somebody at Alliant is full of - - - -,

I am not a scientist or a chemist....I am a reloader. That said, when the manufacturer of powder tells me a certain combination is unsafe, I tend to believe them. I doubt very much if they would lie just to reduce sales or to ward off potential buyers. Again, this warning has been around for over a year and many explanations for why it came about have surfaced. New formulations and newer and better testing equipment are the most prevalent. I believe if you want a better answer you can e-mail Alliant for an answer....I know of many that have. This is what is posted on their website........

Quote:
At Alliant Powder, we take safety seriously. That’s why we periodically test our products in different situations to be sure our use recommendations stay current. Check here for any safety notes or recall information. Stay safe and keep accurate.

Alliant Powder periodically reviews and tests their published reloading data to verify that our recommended recipes have not changed over time.

During the latest review Alliant Powder discovered that Alliant Powder's Blue Dot® should not be used in the following applications:

* Blue Dot® should NOT be used in the 357 Magnum load using the 125 grain projectile (Blue Dot® recipes with heavier bullet weights as specified in Alliant Powders Reloading Guide are acceptable for use).
* Blue Dot® should NOT be used in the 41 Magnum cartridge (all bullet weights).

Use of Blue Dot® in the above cases may cause a high pressure situation that could cause property damage and serious personal injury.

We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause and appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #8  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:10 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

FWIW.....I've heard from sources that I believe to be reliable that the cold weather/pressure spikes with Bluedot have occured with temps as mild as 20F.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:20 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 499 Times in 274 Posts
Thumbs up Perspective, it's all perspective!

Quote:
Originally Posted by canoe on the yukon View Post
FWIW.....I've heard from sources that I believe to be reliable that the cold weather/pressure spikes with Bluedot have occured with temps as mild as 20F.
Only from a guy in Alaska can 20F be considered "mild"!

In all seriousness, I remember seeing this phenomenon at temperatures in the area canoe has mentioned. I thought it was kind of weird that I would get 2200fps from a round loaded just like another that gave only 1200fps!

I used Blue Dot when I first started to load magnum cases as it was readily available locally and cheap. After that incident though, I used it for fertilizer.


Mild, short shirt sleeve weather, hey!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-25-2009, 10:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Near Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

If anything sounds fishy it's them saying not to use it in .41 mag. What the hell kind of sense does that make? It's ok to use in .357 and .44 but not the cartridge in between?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:11 PM
Alk8944's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sandy Utah
Posts: 3,749
Likes: 199
Liked 978 Times in 544 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LazarusLong View Post
If anything sounds fishy it's them saying not to use it in .41 mag. What the hell kind of sense does that make? It's ok to use in .357 and .44 but not the cartridge in between?
Lazarus,

This isn't really pointed at you, but rather everyone who posted something similar.

You are right, it doesn't seem logical! But consider this, don't you think the manufacturer of any product must have a really good reason to publish such specific recommendations/warnings about their own product? This is certainly not something the company would take lightly.

Witness Hodgdon and Winchester for years claiming there was no problem with reduced charges of H-110/296 in spite of masses of anecdotal evidence that guns were being blown up with reduced loads. That situation did not seem logical either, but it is widely known now that this does happen and both manufacturers now publish a strong warning about reducing loads for this (for H-110/296 are identical, same manufacturer), Winchester recommends not reducing more than 3% below their published maximums, and Hodgdon uses 5%. Both publish only a maximum load!

You, and anyone else, can do as you please with the warning, and I know you will. It seems to be, at the very least, exceedingly imprudent to not only argue/disagree but disregard and advise others to do the same concerning a warning issued by any manufacturer about it's own product.

FWIW, I have loaded Blue Dot in virtually no cartridge EXCEPT .41 Magnum for about 35 years with no problems whatsoever. There are other propellants which will do as well, possibly better in this cartridge than Blue Dot, why not accept their warning? It certainly was not issued frivolously or without much corporate soul searching!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:30 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Alk8944,

Guns were being blown up with reduced loads of W296/H110?Where and when?

W296 and H110 give poor burning qualities when downloaded too much.Squib loads can result.Guns blown up?Where and when?Be specific.I don't think you can.

About warnings not to download,I can very vividly remember Winchester advising not to download and that was 40 years ago.What sources of information are you drawing from?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:38 AM
Paul5388's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rusk Co. Texas
Posts: 1,326
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
It certainly was not issued frivolously or without much corporate soul searching!
It probably wasn't, but it also falls into the same category as H110/W296. If there is a problem with two cartridges, then there's a problem that hasn't been addressed properly. In this kind of situation, you don't issue warnings, you issue recalls of the offending products.

You also don't make a blanket warning when people have been safely using Blue Dot loads in .357 and .41 for 30 years. The simple solution is to recall all of it or recall what lots are presenting the problem.

It has to be remembered that everyone doesn't have access to internet warnings and some don't want access!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-26-2009, 11:04 AM
n4zov's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: S.E. USA
Posts: 1,951
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 11 Posts
Default

I don't have a clue why Alliant issued the Blue Dot warning and frankly I do not care! If the guys who make the stuff say it is unsafe to use in such and such a combination, that is good enough for me. Frankly I never found Blue Dot particularly useful in any handgun cartridge I tried it in. Unusual pressure spikes were fairly common, and it never seemed to accomplish anything that another powder didn't do better.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:20 PM
Alk8944's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sandy Utah
Posts: 3,749
Likes: 199
Liked 978 Times in 544 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canoe on the yukon View Post
Alk8944,

Guns were being blown up with reduced loads of W296/H110?Where and when?

W296 and H110 give poor burning qualities when downloaded too much.Squib loads can result.Guns blown up?Where and when?Be specific.I don't think you can.

About warnings not to download,I can very vividly remember Winchester advising not to download and that was 40 years ago.What sources of information are you drawing from?
First, there have been articles in the firearms press for many years related to destruction of revolvers under unexplanable circumstances when using H-110/296. Specific articles, I don't keep magazines mostly so can't cite specific articles. There was something written about this in just about all the magazines by well respected authors and there were many attempts to explain what was happening. Terms were created to express the theories, such as "Pressure Excursions" and "Secondary Explosion Effect". These articles appeared mostly from the mid 80s through the 90s. If you don't recall these either you weren't reading gun magazines during that period or just plain weren't paying attention.

So far as Winchester advising against downloading "40 years ago" what powder are you talking about? 296 did not even exist until 1980 or so!

Just because you don't choose to believe it doesn't mean it wasn't happening.

Here are some links to articles about the subject:
http://www.reloadammo.com/liteload.htm
http://www.gunfighter.com/cgi-bin/bb...cgi?read=47714
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i.../t-142220.html

Not all specific to H-110/296, but the same issue.

Last edited by Alk8944; 07-26-2009 at 12:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:01 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: \'ell if I know
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
Liked 215 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canoe on the yukon View Post
Alk8944,

Guns were being blown up with reduced loads of W296/H110?Where and when?

W296 and H110 give poor burning qualities when downloaded too much.Squib loads can result.Guns blown up?Where and when?Be specific.I don't think you can.
I probably can get a pic of a bulged barrel because a friend of mine, like many here, not formally educated in powder manufacturing, thought he knew more about a powder than the manufacturer. Altho he knew of the warnings issued by Hodgdon about downloading H110, he had "safely" been doing it for years. I figure he was just lucky till, about a year ago when he tried to send another bullet down the barrel with a squib still stuck in it. Of course, now it's all Hodgdon's fault.

Again, if you desire not to heed the warnings by those that obviously know more than you do, fine, that is your option, and it's your gun and your azz. But don't recommend to others to follow your lead.

Last edited by buck460XVR; 07-26-2009 at 01:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-26-2009, 08:41 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

296 wasn't made until 1980???...Where did you get that????...I'm looking at a Winchester manual right now which was REPRINTED in 1973 which gives data for 296.....and in it,they clearly state that one should not reduce loads because of LOWER PRESSURE CAUSING SQUIBBS....I have been handloading for over 40 years.....One of the powders that I used early on was H110 and H110 and W296 were ALWAYS the same powder.

When too little pressure causes a squibb load and the bullet lodges in the barrel and then someone fires a round behind it,the obstruction in the barrel will cause it to burst.....this has absolutely nothing to do with which powder caused the squibb nor the round that follows it.

Downloading 296 and H110 causes TOO LITTLE PRESSURE.....NOT TOO MUCH!!!!!

You have been making up facts as you go along and now you're pretending otherwise.You can't give the specifics of your claims because there aren't any.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-26-2009, 09:47 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

I just read the links you provided.You said it was not ALL about 296.....Correction......NONE OF IT WAS ABOUT 296.

The write ups you referred to have been well known for many years.Whenever greatly reduced slow rifle powders are used,the burning rate can change,at least in theory.No lab has been able to duplicate this to my knowledge but this is when someone uses a ridiculous undercharge that is very inappropriate for the case and bullet.

In another example,charges that are too light have been accused of causing blow ups when using Bullseye.No lab has ever been able to duplicate it.

After exhaustive tests,no lab can seem to make it happen.Now,getting back to 296......Hodgdon markets the same powder with one name and Winchester markets it under another name.I was using H110 in 1970 and the Winchester manual I referred to was printed at sometime BEFORE 1973.

H110/W296 are extremely popular and have been for a very long time.Come to think of it,Hornady and Sierra are two sources that give data for what many would call reduced loads with this powder.I wonder if they're losing sleep at night.

AGAIN....charges that are too light can result in TOO LITTLE pressure with a distinct possibility of squibbs.

None of this has anything to do with Bluedot.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-26-2009, 10:03 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 499 Times in 274 Posts
Cool Two powders that are on the same list as far as I'm concerned!

I haven't used but one pound of Unique in all of my reloading career. I haven't used more than one pound of H110 either. It happens to be on the short list of those powders that I won't ever buy again. I left one out, Blue Dot. I got some when I first started loading 357Mag because I wanted to duplicate the loads that OCD1 showed the box of from UMC. They are 125gr bullets and they really sing as I remembered. In my state of "noviceness" I tried to get to that velocity with Blue Dot. I had a chronograph and that saved me. I shot whatever load over it and had them go from 1200fps to 2200fps. I said, never again, and I switched to the MILSURP powder WC820 that loads like AA#9. I bought 8lbs for $8/lb and have only about half of the jug gone.


FWIW
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-26-2009, 10:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Near Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alk8944 View Post
Lazarus,

This isn't really pointed at you, but rather everyone who posted something similar.

You are right, it doesn't seem logical! But consider this, don't you think the manufacturer of any product must have a really good reason to publish such specific recommendations/warnings about their own product? This is certainly not something the company would take lightly.

Witness Hodgdon and Winchester for years claiming there was no problem with reduced charges of H-110/296 in spite of masses of anecdotal evidence that guns were being blown up with reduced loads. That situation did not seem logical either, but it is widely known now that this does happen and both manufacturers now publish a strong warning about reducing loads for this (for H-110/296 are identical, same manufacturer), Winchester recommends not reducing more than 3% below their published maximums, and Hodgdon uses 5%. Both publish only a maximum load!

You, and anyone else, can do as you please with the warning, and I know you will. It seems to be, at the very least, exceedingly imprudent to not only argue/disagree but disregard and advise others to do the same concerning a warning issued by any manufacturer about it's own product.

FWIW, I have loaded Blue Dot in virtually no cartridge EXCEPT .41 Magnum for about 35 years with no problems whatsoever. There are other propellants which will do as well, possibly better in this cartridge than Blue Dot, why not accept their warning? It certainly was not issued frivolously or without much corporate soul searching!
You may be right but my personal theory on it is that some guys blew up their Model 57's with it and then commenced to give a piece of their mind to Alliant who then CYA'd. They know as well as anyone that people are going to use what they are going to use regardless. Why anyone uses it for handguns period is beyond me, it seems like there is a lot of evidence of it being pretty tempermental. IE hitting the extractor rod and having case heads pop out of the cylinder with loads that aren't over manual max.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-26-2009, 11:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

I have never used Bluedot for the simple reason that it's reputed to be sensitive to cold temps and that keeps me away from it.

That being said,it appears to me that there is an ongoing trend to blame the product first and never question the user.When something is mis-used,it's the fault of the user.This redundant statement seems to be missed.

When reading the links provided by Alk8944,one thing was abundantely clear.The underloads and so forth that were being referred to were ridiculous. The loading procedures,charge weights,powders,etc,etc were all very inapropriate.It matters none at all that these were loaded by grown men who profess to know what they're.

It reminds me of the old joke about the man who threw away his typewriter because it didn't spell worth a damn.

Some of the loads,procedures,etc that I saw in these links were absurd.If someone only uses half the amount of powder needed ,what result should be expected?

To be as kindly as possible,some people should NOT reload....PERIOD.

If I use an inapropriate powder,what should I expect?If I use a greatly exagerated reduction in powder,what should I expect?To me,this is pretty simple.

At what point do we simply blame the stupidity of those who will not follow instructions along with some common sense?

To take a brief glance back at the 296 issue,Several manuals (Hornady and Sierra)for example give data for loads that are WAY BELOW the 3% reduction limit suggested by Hodgdon.Are they worrying?

Quite often,a company realizes that many of it's customers are actually idiots and they will go to extremes to protect the idiot from himself.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-27-2009, 02:42 AM
Paul5388's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rusk Co. Texas
Posts: 1,326
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Caliber of tested cartridge was .243 Winchester, bullet weight 80 grains, powder then-new NORMA MRP, and the charge... surprisingly... just 15 % less than a maximum (compressed !) load. It was STILL A REDUCED CHARGE DETONATION; not one caused by an excessive charge, because the charge could not be excessive with those components in use. Light bullet and slowly burning powder is not an advisable combination of loading components for .243 Win., known as a caliber prone to S.E. Effect. (It's "big brother" .308 and "kid brother" .22-250 are considerably less risky; last mentioned presumably because of more steep 25 degrees shoulder angle).

Needless to say: All the loading components were examined carefully afterwards. They were faultless. Just the burning rate of powder was selected wrongly for the bullet weight. MRP powder is O.K. for .243 Win., but for the heaviest bullets of this caliber; weight 100 or 105 grains. For the most usual 90 grainer bullets is some more fast-burning propellant advisable.

Noted was a slightly less than a tenth of second lasting delay between hit of a striker and explosion. This same delay is noted also by survivors of S.E.E. accidents, if they can remember something from the "big bang". (Usual recollection is: "I squeezed the trigger and woke up in the hospital"). If the delay lasts a second or more, it is just an usual hang-fire, without signs of excessive pressure.
<snip>
P.S. That story about two broken .243 Win. test-barrels and purposeful courting of S.E.E. in Germany is told in the book "Handbuch für den Wiederlader" by K.D.MEYER, who was then a director of German DEVA Institute.
I've never heard of SEE in a handgun. That doesn't mean it can't happen, but it's highly unlikely.

One of the moderators on another forum shot some factory .357 Mag loads that clocked less than 1100 fps and I believe the bullet was less than 158 gr. That's hardly what I call a .357 Mag load, but that's what the manufacturer sells for that application and it's for self defense! Manufacturers have some strange ideas on a lot of subjects.

I have about 8 pounds of Blue Dot on hand. I rarely load it in handgun cartridges, but if I want to, I will. One reason is, it rarely gets down to 20 degrees around here. Another reason is, Alliant has no idea what gun I'm shooting, or its condition. I mostly use 2 N frames, a Dan Wesson and 2 rifles, all in .357 Mag. The rifles will clock 2200 fps with 125 gr bullets, but I don't use Blue Dot to do that. The 6" N frame will clock 1600+ fps with a 125 gr bullet, but not with Blue Dot.

The book recommended 14.5 gr of Blue Dot with a 125 gr bullet is, in my experience (1/23/04), a 1.5 gr overload and it has been that way too long. In fact, it was as late as 2004 & 2005 that Alliant published that load in their reloading guide. Then in 2008, they list only 16.0 gr of Blue Dot with a 110 gr bullet and 11.5 gr with a 140 gr bullet. It took them 33 years, give or take a little, to correct an overload problem that should have been apparent long ago. The only problem is, they didn't correct anything, but instead, they ignored it, so maybe it'll go away. A warning isn't a solution, reducing the loads is the solution.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-27-2009, 05:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 60 Posts
Default

I've loaded 13.8grs of Blue Dot behind a 125gr JHP bullet in the .357 mag for years as a factory equivalent full power load that chrono's from my 4" revolvers at around 1,450 fps.

I talked to the Alliant rep at the NRA convention regarding their warning. His response to me was that they noticed the problem with recent lots of Blue Dot and they where trying to figure out what has changed. He said if I hadn't had any problems and I was using an older lot of powder then don't worry about it.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-27-2009, 10:46 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oregon, the less dry side
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

H110's purported tendency to "detonate" when down loaded has always seemed fishy to me. It's tendency to incomplety burn, thereby obstructing the barrel, makes a lot of sense. I use H110 for magnum loads only.

As far as Blue Dot goes, I used it for 125 gr 357 loads several years ago. Speer number 11 max load is 16.3 grains. Muzzle blast and flash were impressive, to say the least. Flame cutting to my 686 was pretty severe. I'm glad I shot only a few. I was new to reloading at the time and realized I needed to do more research before approaching maximum loads. At the time I felt lucky to have suffered no more damage than flame cutting.

Not sure where I was going with this.
__________________
It's around here somewhere!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-27-2009, 10:56 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hoosier Land!
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 587
Liked 499 Times in 274 Posts
Cool Other powders do the same thing!

OK, don't ask me how I know this!

I was going to see if I could download AA#5 to AA#2 velocity levels. The cartridge was the 38spl. After firing one shot at those reduced levels, I had a squib stuck in my barrel. I cleared it and shot another with the same results, pulled the rest.

All powders have a range of effectiveness. The lower levels are part of a recipe as well as the top ones, period.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-27-2009, 01:48 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

I highly suspect that most of the catastrophic events that I hear about can be directly traced to the reloader rather than the powder.Some of the examples of powder misuse are extreme and is a reminder that not everyone should be a reloader.

It's amusing to me that someone will pop up on occasion and point to an idiotic misuse and then use that as the basis for an indictment against the powder.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-28-2009, 01:19 AM
Paul5388's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rusk Co. Texas
Posts: 1,326
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Default

On 1/23/04 I was doing a comparison between several powders using the same components. It was 73 degrees F that day, even though it was in January.

I checked the chronograph with Federal Match .22 LR that has the velocity printed on the box. The results I got were consistent with what was printed.

With 13.0 gr of Blue Dot in R-P .357 Brass with a 125 gr Golden Saber and CCI 400 (small rifle) in a 6" Ruger Security Six, I clocked the following:
1. 1430
2. 1421
3. 1438
4. 1403
5. 1403
The average MV (not instrumental) was 1458 fps.

Using the same components, except 14.5 gr of Blue Dot, I clocked the following:
1. 1500
2. 1500
3. 1462
4. 1410
5. 1422
The average MV was 1497 fps.

The 14.5 gr loaded had to be bumped out of the cylinder and it only produced 39 fps more velocity than 1.5 gr less powder. That's a pretty good indication 14.5 gr is an overload, even with a lot of powder that wasn't as new as what they say they're having problems with.

As a comparison, still using the same components, I also clocked 1500 fps MV with 10.0 gr of 800X and 1624 fps MV with 14.0 gr of SR 4756. However, the Blue Dot load was the only one that had to be bumped out of the cylinder.

I really don't see a problem with the 13.0 gr load, if 1450 fps is all you want with a 125 gr bullet. After all, that's about 400+ fps faster than those factory loads I wrote about earlier.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-29-2009, 10:16 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I used 14.0 grains of Blue Dot under the Lyman #410610 for years, and never had a problem. I was getting about 1225 fps with that combination and accuracy was fine.

I don't have any idea why Blue Dot would be any more dangerous in one straight-walled revolver case than another, and it makes no sense to me at all. On the other hand, it also makes no sense to me that a powder manufacturer would discourage use of its product unnecessarily.

I don't have the answers, but I do have a jug of Blue Dot that will sit on the shelf until this thing clears up. There are other powders that work just as well---if not better---in my .41 Mag. That would be the one I wish to retain its structural integrity!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-31-2009, 01:34 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Citrus County, Florida
Posts: 1,947
Likes: 1
Liked 83 Times in 48 Posts
Default

“I don't have any idea why Blue Dot would be any more dangerous in one straight-walled revolver case than another, and it makes no sense to me at all. On the other hand, it also makes no sense to me that a powder manufacturer would discourage use of its product unnecessarily.

I don't have the answers, but I do have a jug of Blue Dot that will sit on the shelf until this thing clears up. There are other powders that work just as well---if not better---in my .41 Mag. That would be the one I wish to retain its structural integrity! “

+1---------- I have not use Blue Dot in years and have none on the shelf. I was going to get a pound in my pursuit of a 200 grain lead 10mm load, but why should I? It may be that they have hired a new bunch of lawyers, it may be that the .41 mag, is not worth testing because of usage, I neither know or care.
There are many powders available which will yield the same or better results many of which probably are on my shelf.
I do know that the likely problem is not detonation but a stuck bullet or extreme gas cutting. I believe this condemned the .357 maximum. It seems that the bullet moves so fast that an extreme pressure drop occurs which in effect extinguishes the fire, leaving the bullet in the barrel, but still cutting the strap. It’s a nice theory anyway.
In my old age I just avoid this kind of problem..
__________________
Ipsis Rebus Dictantitbus
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-08-2009, 10:23 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: East Coast
Posts: 78
Likes: 21
Liked 22 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Back in my original days of handgun reloading about 30 years ago, I too used Blue Dot to make factory-equivalent 125 grain .357 Magnum loads. I loaded 14.5 grains under a Sierra 125 JHC, and used it as a carry load in my 4" Ruger Security Six. That load was a humdinger: ear-splitting bright muzzle blast, plenty recoil, and accurate. Carried in 85 F to 10 F. Never recall a problem. Velocity ran 1450 fps.

When I got a 4" Colt Trooper .357, I loaded 13.7 grains of Blue Dot with the 140 grain Speer JHP. That was another real blaster that did 1340 fps.

I liked both loads. Don't load .357 anymore, but given all the hoopla I wouldn't use Blue Dot if I did.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-16-2009, 10:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 376
Likes: 5
Liked 36 Times in 24 Posts
Default

We can't help but speculate and debate this to death because Alliant didn't publish sufficient information. I suspect(but don't know) that the .41 mag issue is that they don't trust their own data with new lots. Despite decades of 125 grain .357 and Blue Dot use I suspect that there may have always been a problem tied to burn rate and cylinder gap/forcing cone jump. Most of us are aware that the factory .357 has been gelded and S&W introduced the L frame due to premature wear of police K frames firing 125 grain .357s. it seems that hot 125 grain loads arethe biggest offenders when it comes to gas cutting of the top strap. My own hypothesis is that in some guns with rough forcing cones the normal pressure spike which occurs in revolvers during the cylinder/barrel transition can get completely out of hand with Blue dot. I also wonder if perhaps some of the huge cuts in published 4756 data might be due to such spiking.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-16-2009, 06:40 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ohio
Posts: 405
Likes: 6
Liked 84 Times in 53 Posts
Default

Groo here
Treeman I think you are verrrry close to the problem...
I also used bluedot until I got 296 [ loaded hot in those days] used that pound up and got no more..
The pressure spike at the bc gap maybe the problem in all this,
along with the condition of saving brass [ aka don't crimp much-ides]
that handloaders do.
Keith said that the then new powers [smokeless] were hard to light
and needed a good crimp. We have people saying that they don't
crimp at all now!!!! The powder companies must take this into consideration when they publish data.
In PPC and now in SASS there has been a rash of kbooms
with light loads.
I think that what is happening is the primer is blowing the bullet
past the crimp and it stoppes at the bc gap and then the powder
starts to burn well- this makes the bullet a plug and we all knows
what happens next....
I will no longer load a round that is not crimped at least normal if
not heavy and I will not load a powder below starting.
If I need less I go to a smaller gun or a different powder[aka Trailboss]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
357 magnum, 38spl, 686, bullseye, cartridge, chronograph, colt, crimp, dan wesson, hornady, k frame, l frame, model 66, nra, ppc, primer, ruger, sass, sig arms, transition, trooper, umc, winchester

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Reloading Thread, .357 Magnum 125 grain bullets and Blue Dot.... in Ammunition-Gunsmithing; Someone posted here not long ago that thier reloading manual contained a warning advising against loading .357 Magnum 125 grain ...
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://smith-wessonforum.com/reloading/93778-357-magnum-125-grain-bullets-blue-dot.html
Posted By For Type Date
I have a question - Calguns.net This thread Refback 01-02-2014 10:27 PM

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hornady .357 CL-SIL & JTC-SIL 160 grain bullets? Cocked & Locked Reloading 0 02-18-2010 08:28 AM
Hornady FTX 265 grain Bullets in 44 Magnum and 444 Marlin. TNRat Reloading 4 09-06-2009 10:18 PM
600 grain bullets for 500 duman444 Reloading 2 08-11-2009 06:20 PM
Win 296 and 110 grain bullets in a 357 vojac45 Reloading 16 04-14-2009 01:14 PM
Testing LBT 180 grain .38 bullets AzShooter Reloading 10 01-13-2009 09:48 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:16 AM.


© S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)