Are the guns weaker on this side of the pond?

[Hoptob]

We had our fair share of discussions why old manuals show warmer 38 special charges than new manuals. All sorts of reasons were brought in: better pressure measurement equipment, smaller and weaker modern guns, lawers/policies, conspiracy, lesser generation of the shooters...

Here is an interesting find for those who cares about this. Back in 2002 Finish powder manufacturer Vihta Vuori published a reloading manual. There were 2 versions of the manual; one in Finish (dated January 2002) and another - in English (Feb 2002).

You would think it'd be a job for an interpreter to translate a reloading manual. Well, it ain't so. Turns out it's a job for a ballistician. How so? Look closely at the recipes in 38 special section. In English version each load is reduced. EACH load.

How are we going to explain that? Are the guns weaker on this side of the pond?

BTW, Speer #14 has loads with VV powders reduced even further. In some cases there is a full grain of difference between Speer #14 and Finish version of 2002 VV manual. To the tune of 200 fps!

Mike

 

[Hoptob]

We had our fair share of discussions why old manuals show warmer 38 special charges than new manuals. All sorts of reasons were brought in: better pressure measurement equipment, smaller and weaker modern guns, lawers/policies, conspiracy, lesser generation of the shooters...

Here is an interesting find for those who cares about this. Back in 2002 Finish powder manufacturer Vihta Vuori published a reloading manual. There were 2 versions of the manual; one in Finish (dated January 2002) and another - in English (Feb 2002).

You would think it'd be a job for an interpreter to translate a reloading manual. Well, it ain't so. Turns out it's a job for a ballistician. How so? Look closely at the recipes in 38 special section. In English version each load is reduced. EACH load.

How are we going to explain that? Are the guns weaker on this side of the pond?

BTW, Speer #14 has loads with VV powders reduced even further. In some cases there is a full grain of difference between Speer #14 and Finish version of 2002 VV manual. To the tune of 200 fps!

Mike

 

[nicky4968]

There are people all over the world who think they somehow lend strength, speed, and character to the things they own. Because they own it, it is stronger, faster, and generally better than others from the same manufacturer. This includes motorcycles, cars, boats, and, yes, firearms.

This type of person always starts with the top load and "works his way up". Sometimes resulting in a wrecked motorcycle, car, boat, etc.

I imagine in Finland if you were to engage in such foolish activities they would tell you that you got exactly what you deserve. In this country, the manufacturer has to leave a little more "wiggle room" so if someone does exceed the limits it is by such a wide margin that they may escape a verdict against them.

Just my $0.02.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Oh no Mike, did you notice there is no pressure data for those loads? OH NO (he says smirking!

)

That was the big reason some of our other manuals were pooh-poohed, no pressure data.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think it has anything to do with litigation practices? Or do you think they would take the chance of only blowing up guns here in the U.S.?

 

[TiroFijo]

You can download the 2006 manual on line.

Pressure data? they say:

"All of this reloading information has been provided by Nammo Lapua Oy. The data given here
were obtained in laboratory conditions following strictly the CIP (Commission International Permanente) June 13, 1990 and November 9, 1993 rules. The listed maximum loads have been determined according to the respective CIP/SAAMI maximum pressure specification, whichever is lower.
These test methods have been deemed to be safe throughout the world. Pressure is measured at
the case mouth or from inside the case according to the CIP
DO NOT ATTEMPT ANY EXTRAPOLATIONS. PLEASE FOLLOW THE DATA AS WRITTEN."

 

[venomballistics]

with how these debates go on sometimes, Im almost ready to say "if the charge fits, crimp it"

 

[pinkymingeo]

I think it was Professor LeBotte (or was it TiteBotte?) who, in his seminal paper "Rigid Crystalline Properties of Crappy American Guns" demonstrated conclusively that all firearms manufactured in the United States are made not from steel, rather an investment cast mixture of pasta and recycled Alpo cans. Since that time, all pressure standards worldwide have been adjusted downward to reflect the inherent weakness in American firearms.

 

[Erich]

Tort lawyers are stronger on this side . . .

 

[Skip Sackett]

Originally posted by TiroFijo:
You can download the 2006 manual on line.

Pressure data? they say:

"All of this reloading information has been provided by Nammo Lapua Oy. The data given here
were obtained in laboratory conditions following strictly the CIP (Commission International Permanente) June 13, 1990 and November 9, 1993 rules. The listed maximum loads have been determined according to the respective CIP/SAAMI maximum pressure specification, whichever is lower.
These test methods have been deemed to be safe throughout the world. Pressure is measured at
the case mouth or from inside the case according to the CIP
DO NOT ATTEMPT ANY EXTRAPOLATIONS. PLEASE FOLLOW THE DATA AS WRITTEN."

Tiro,
They must have the corner on magic powder then!

A 160gr LRNFP doing 1100fps out of a 6 1/2" bbl? Look at the powder burn rate chart and see where N340 fits in. Take a look at where 3N37 falls in. That's right now look smack dab in the middle of both of those powders. Kind of telling isn't it!

 

[pps]

Originally posted by Erich:
Tort lawyers are stronger on this side . . .

lol. Love lawyers that can make fun of themselves.

 

[Jellybean]

There is nothing unusual about it at all. I have their reloading manual 2nd edition from 1995, they list the max. pressures for both SAAMI and CIP which are different. The "metric units" data is loaded to CIP standards and the "english units" data is loaded to SAAMI standards.

My manual gives pressures for both sets of data.

 

[Hoptob]

A 160gr LRNFP doing 1100fps out of a 6 1/2" bbl?

I have even better news for you guys. 351 m/s is 1151 fps. That's 38 special I can live with!

Where can I get more of those foreign reloading manuals? They look good, really good...

Pinky, about those crappy american guns... Guess what kind of revolvers Lapua advertises? Yeah, that's right - S&W, Ruger and Taurus...

Mike

P.S. Jelly, would you mind posting a scan from your manual? I'd be curious to see the pressures. I am sure Skip wants to see them too

 

[Jellybean]

Mike, I can't scan the page or even copy a picture of it right now. However, they make life easy in their manual, their loads are calculated by max pressure, in other words they're all the same.

There are a couple of cautions here first, I have noticed some typographical errors both on the data you posted and between the two sources so be careful. Also my book doesn't have the data for the 125gr. Rainier bullets, but it does have data for a 180gr. Lapua TERA bullet, everything else seems to be the same.

Now the facts. The maximum CIP pressure for the .38 spl. is 160 MPa which is 23,200psi. The conversion for MPa to psi is: 1 MPa = 145.036 psi. They have a rounded off conversion chart in the back of the book I'm going to use to help you out.

All of the starting loads for the metric units is rated at 115 MPa (16679 psi.)

All of the maximum loads listed in the metric units is rated at 155 MPa (22,481 psi)

There is a difference in the English units between the two sources. Your manual states the loads are +P pressures while mine doesn't. In my book they all max. out at 16,200 psi.

 

[Hoptob]

Thank you very much, Jelly. This is really good information!

BTW, guys, did we just solve Tim Sundles' misterious BB +P load? I mean 160 gr. LFN @ 1150 fps from 6-1/2" bbl would put it right around 1000 fps from 2" bbl. And according to Jelly's book this is well within CIP 38 spl spec... Time to get some N340...

Mike

 

[Paul5388]

I think I'd want to see some real world velocities before I jumped on the band wagon.

 

[Jellybean]

Glad I could help Mike. You raised an intersting question earlier, about OTHER CIP loading manuals. I know there are forum members from other countries, where do you guys get your loading data?

 

[Jellybean]

Where'd everyone go? We never addressed Mikes original question of wether the guns are weaker on this side of the pond.

U.S. manufacturers that voluntarily agree to conform to SAAMI specifications make their products to meet or exceed these requirements.

CIP member countries do the same, except, from what I've read, if your country is a member compliance is mandatory.

The CIP standards seem to allow higher pressures for most of the cartridges I've looked at so just how junky are these guns we call junk? There is one thought too, CIP standards are for proof testing standards. So while the gun might fall apart in your hand from inferior parts, it won't blow up from SAAMI pressure loads. Wait, which side of the pond was I talking about?

 

[Hoptob]

Hi Jelly,

I was wondering about something you said. "There is one thought too, CIP standards are for proof testing standards". Are you sure about it? There isn't any indication in the tables I have that recommended loads are meant for testing only. So far I assumed that all loads are for shooting but can be wrong.

Mike

 

[Paul5388]

Mike,

I believe CIP mandates a proof to their specs on each gun in addition to having specs on the loaded ammo.

 

[Jellybean]

Sorry Mike, I got a little tongue tied there. The CIP sets the standards for proof testing firearms in their member countries. I wasn't referring to commercial ammunition.