Black_Talon
Member
Current production WW 231. Scale is in inches, with each hash-mark equal to .010"
...and a little closer:
...and a little closer:
Photographic database of gunpowders (from URUGUAY)
- Thread starter TIROyRECARGA
- Start date
Paul5388
US Veteran
Here's Unique from the 1940s.
DuPont SR 4756 from 1975
Red Dot from the 1950s
Hi Vel #2 from the 1940s
DuPont #6 from 1940-1950
Alcan 7 from the 1970s
DuPont 700X from 1979
I might be able to get better close up pictures if I would read the instruction manual.
BTW, four of those powders can be seen on the top shelf with the 8 pound cans.
DuPont SR 4756 from 1975
Red Dot from the 1950s
Hi Vel #2 from the 1940s
DuPont #6 from 1940-1950
Alcan 7 from the 1970s
DuPont 700X from 1979
I might be able to get better close up pictures if I would read the instruction manual.
BTW, four of those powders can be seen on the top shelf with the 8 pound cans.
Last edited:
Reddog
Absent Comrade
Tiro,
It's DuPont and I'm pretty sure it's from the 1960s. Did you notice, there is no yellow flake in my sample?
Dick
It's DuPont and I'm pretty sure it's from the 1960s. Did you notice, there is no yellow flake in my sample?
Dick
Tiro,
INTERESTING series of posts! Can you tell me the size of the squares in the background of some of the pix?
INTERESTING series of posts! Can you tell me the size of the squares in the background of some of the pix?
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
Dear Black Talon, Paul5388, OCD1 and other friends:
I would like to thank you for the job of photographing these powders. Your pictures will be useful for the work I'm doing.
By the way, I will share with you my latest job, somewhat like a "Gunpowder Library" to:
- To help users to know gunpowders and to identify them (when they not have other means to do it).
- To create a database to serve as a reference for comparisons, or other type of researchs.
- To have our own samples in order to improve our "Photo Library of gunpowders."
I am posting high resolution pictures (1550x900 pixels). Click on each picture to see it in high detail.
(my resize bbcode isn't working here, I need to learn how to).
I would like to thank you for the job of photographing these powders. Your pictures will be useful for the work I'm doing.
By the way, I will share with you my latest job, somewhat like a "Gunpowder Library" to:
- To help users to know gunpowders and to identify them (when they not have other means to do it).
- To create a database to serve as a reference for comparisons, or other type of researchs.
- To have our own samples in order to improve our "Photo Library of gunpowders."
I am posting high resolution pictures (1550x900 pixels). Click on each picture to see it in high detail.
(my resize bbcode isn't working here, I need to learn how to).
Last edited:
Reddog
Absent Comrade
Tiro,
I told you wrong in an earlier post. The 700X I have is IMR, not Dupont. Sorry!
Your pics are great! How large are those bottles?
Dick
I told you wrong in an earlier post. The 700X I have is IMR, not Dupont. Sorry!
Your pics are great! How large are those bottles?
Dick
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
Dear Dick:
My little bottles really are injection vials with a 10ml capacity and 48x22mm.
According to the gunpowder you're storing, each vial of 10ml will have a capacity from 110 to 180 grains.
Vials are similar as these:
And with this kind of vials, you could (if you can access to the specialized tool) sealing them with an aluminum crimped ring.
But there are some other options as vials with screw caps:
Last edited:
Hoptob
Member
Nice collection, Tiro. Thank you for sharing!
Awhile back I took and posted on this forum a picture of the powder from famed Buffalo Bore 38spl +P load
Please let us know if anything in your database looks like it.
Mike
Awhile back I took and posted on this forum a picture of the powder from famed Buffalo Bore 38spl +P load
Please let us know if anything in your database looks like it.
Mike
cmj8591
Member
All this is very interesting and the photography is great but I'm not sure what the practical value is. Like one of the previous posters said, if you are trying to identify unknown powders by sight you are asking for trouble. There are so many uncatalogued powders out there that look like one thing but act like another. I understand trying to keep costs as low as possible, but what is it worth if it leads to a blown gun or, worst yet, an injury. If you are reloading, your powder should only come from a sealed factory container that you have opened yourself. Anything else is just flirting with disaster.
Paul5388
US Veteran
Some powder is better than no powder and doing without is what you're asking T&R to do.
Treating everything like it's Bullseye will ensure there isn't a blown gun gun and if there's a squib, just knock the bullet out of the barrel and add more powder.
Treating everything like it's Bullseye will ensure there isn't a blown gun gun and if there's a squib, just knock the bullet out of the barrel and add more powder.
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
Dear cmj8591:
I think I've already answered about all these points (*) and I am agreed with you but, I think that I couldn't help anyone just acting so idealistically and simply saying "follow the book's word".
The reality here is a bit different than yours and it's forces us to do not-so-idealistic things.
So, if I am doing this job is only because I am those who think that providing people with as much information as possible is better and more effective than just telling them: "don't do that".
No, it's a matter of availability (as Paul5388 said).
(*) My previous answer: http://smith-wessonforum.com/reload...atabase-gunpowders-uruguay.html#post135583548
Thanks for your opinion and best regards
Last edited:
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
Dear rwnielsen:This stuff facinates me. I might have to get a USB microscope from eBay and join in. I'd like to see 800x up close anyways...
I experimented with 4 instruments:
1) A regular office scanner (from Epson)
2) Industrial scanner (from Sony)
3) Digital USB microscope from INTEL (almost a kid toy but not so bad)
4) German microscope from a laboratory with a digital camera adapted.
With this last tool, the detail was impressive, but the problem is the colors clarity, and the illumination.
I found that the most equilibrated blend was obtained with a good camera (Panasonic DMC-ZS3, 10Mpixel, ISO 80, great macro) but is a good thing to experiment by yourself.
Check this video about gunpowder under electronic microscope:
YouTube - Polveri infumi da ricarica... mai viste così !
I hope I have helped you.
Best regards
Last edited:
cmj8591
Member
Treating everything like bullseye can cause problems too. Dense powders, like WW296, require loading to maximum case capacity. If you load 5 grains of 296 in a 44 magnum case for example, you can create a pressure issue.
I'm not trying to be "idealistic", I'm just trying to illustrate the dangers involved in using an unknown powder. I guess if this system works for you then go for it. The problem is that there are more than a few people who come to these forums to learn how to reload. They have little experience with the hobby and I don't think that they should read this and think that this method of powder identification is OK. Your method is dangerous regardless of your justifications. That's the only way to describe it and readers of this forum need to understand that.
I'm not trying to be "idealistic", I'm just trying to illustrate the dangers involved in using an unknown powder. I guess if this system works for you then go for it. The problem is that there are more than a few people who come to these forums to learn how to reload. They have little experience with the hobby and I don't think that they should read this and think that this method of powder identification is OK. Your method is dangerous regardless of your justifications. That's the only way to describe it and readers of this forum need to understand that.
OP
TIROyRECARGA
Member
Dear cmj8591:
Although at a first glance may not seem, but you and me are doing the same thing. You are trying to illustrate about the dangers involved in using unknow gunpowder, and I am trying to illustrate about the appearance of those gunpowders, and both we have the same purpose: to prevent that a reloader may commit a mistake, for example, to confuse Bullseye with 296.
Therefore, both we are providing reloaders with more information.
And if I didn't mention before, I'll do it right now: the first thing we did (in our forum) before publishing our "Gunpowders Photo Library" was a warn to reloaders with a highlighted red text, telling them that this method of identification couldn't be 100% accurate and the risks involved should force us to be more cautious.
Of course I would like to recommend something like this: "If you have an unknow gunpowder and you have $15 bucks in your wallet, go to the nearest gunpowder's shop and buy a new one."
But here in Uruguay, the gunpowder is a restricted sale item (a maximum of two pounds per person per month) and you need a special license to buy it, therefore, you have only two places to purchase it: in a military unit called "Servicio de Material y Armamento (something like "Supplies and Weapons Service") and in a private shooting club (the only one allowed to sell gunpowder to a reloader with special license).
Occasionally, some reloaders sell their own gunpowder and that is how the other shooters (without license) can get it often paying an overprice ($120 for a pound of rifle powder).
Instead, you have free access to gunpowder and therefore I say that we live in different realities.
Regards and thanks
Although at a first glance may not seem, but you and me are doing the same thing. You are trying to illustrate about the dangers involved in using unknow gunpowder, and I am trying to illustrate about the appearance of those gunpowders, and both we have the same purpose: to prevent that a reloader may commit a mistake, for example, to confuse Bullseye with 296.
Therefore, both we are providing reloaders with more information.
And if I didn't mention before, I'll do it right now: the first thing we did (in our forum) before publishing our "Gunpowders Photo Library" was a warn to reloaders with a highlighted red text, telling them that this method of identification couldn't be 100% accurate and the risks involved should force us to be more cautious.
Of course I would like to recommend something like this: "If you have an unknow gunpowder and you have $15 bucks in your wallet, go to the nearest gunpowder's shop and buy a new one."
But here in Uruguay, the gunpowder is a restricted sale item (a maximum of two pounds per person per month) and you need a special license to buy it, therefore, you have only two places to purchase it: in a military unit called "Servicio de Material y Armamento (something like "Supplies and Weapons Service") and in a private shooting club (the only one allowed to sell gunpowder to a reloader with special license).
Occasionally, some reloaders sell their own gunpowder and that is how the other shooters (without license) can get it often paying an overprice ($120 for a pound of rifle powder).
Instead, you have free access to gunpowder and therefore I say that we live in different realities.
Regards and thanks
Last edited:
Paul5388
US Veteran
The only pressure issue would be too little pressure that would cause a squib, that I have already addressed. As far as a SEE incident, it just doesn't happen, even in .44 Mag sized cases.
cmj8591
Member
The phenomenon that I am talking about is called detonation. It has been observed almost from the beginning of metallic cartridge weapons. It usually occurs when the loading density of a case drops below 30% with certain powders. (The critical loading density changes with the burning rate of the powder) What happens is that the small amount of powder inside of the case has more room to spread out causing more of its surface area to be exposed to the flame of the primer. This causes the pressure to spike violently and can result in the gun bursting. Much like the grain elevator explosions we hear about once in a while. The condition is difficult to replicate in test conditions but it has been done and does occur in the field. The best studies were done by Army Ordinance and DuPont in the 50’s and 60’s. I suggest that you find a book called Hatcher’s Notebook authored by Gen. Julian Hatcher. He goes into depth about internal ballistics and covers this topic. Modern reloading manuals keep loading densities between 60 and 85%. (Some exceptions to this exist). I use the example of 5 grains of 296 because it is only about 15% of the loading density of the 44mag and COULD create the detonation condition.
The wrong amount of the wrong powder will blow up a gun just as easily in Uruguay as it will in the US. The laws of physics are the same for all of us so I think that our realities are more similar than you think.
The wrong amount of the wrong powder will blow up a gun just as easily in Uruguay as it will in the US. The laws of physics are the same for all of us so I think that our realities are more similar than you think.
Paul5388
US Veteran
There's a lot of debate on the causes for SEE (Secondary Explosion Effect), or detonation. The only verified laboratory produced incident I have heard of involved Norma MRP in a .243 Win loading at about 85% density.
I'll check into Hatcher's Notebook, since I think I have a copy.
The norm for reduced loads of W296/H110 is incomplete combustion that leaves a bullet in the barrel, not a SEE event.
I'll check into Hatcher's Notebook, since I think I have a copy.
The norm for reduced loads of W296/H110 is incomplete combustion that leaves a bullet in the barrel, not a SEE event.
Paul5388
US Veteran
I suppose I'll need a little more information on the location in Hatcher's Notebook that discusses detonation (SEE), because the second edition of 1957 doesn't mention it in the index on page 484 or on page 627.
