I've heard it said that ball powders are harder on barrels... Then comparable powders of different types.
Any truth to this.
huck
Any truth to this.
huck
Ball powder compared to the other types
- Thread starter Randall Huckelby
- Start date
CatShooter
strut64 said:
The military was NOT fond of ball powder, because at the time, it was the cause of guns jamming, and they did not care about a theoretical increase in barrel life (which does not exist).
The real reason for the loading of 223 (and then others) with ball powder is the speed of the loading machines, and load volumetric accuracy.
The volume "through put" of commercial loading machines is limited by the sped you can get the powder into the cases - for this reason, commercial machines have multiple powder measures and drop tubes.. as the case runs down the path, each tube drops a small part of the charge. It would take too long for the whole 25gr of powder to drop, but it takes 1/5th the time for five tubes to drop 5 grains - so the machine runs five times as fast and makes five times as much ammunition - that is a BIG deal when you are at war, and young kids are burning up ammo as fast as hey can.
mikegaiz
Stay frosty, my friend.
I think Ball Powder is better for barrel life. But I do not think it is always the best (most accurate) depending on the case. However I do not shoot ball in competition, but love it for varmints. Powder dump is faster and accurate enough. I have a great 243 with a Hart barrel and IMR-4064 is the most accurate, but I shoot H-380 for varmints. It has over 4000, yes 4000 rounds through it and still shoots under 1 in. at 100. It has only shot molly bullets and ball powder. That is my story and I am sticking to it.
I think the real answer on this is "depends". Depends on the caliber, bullet, case, charge, ambient temp, and how the shooter holds his mouth 8)
For some calibers ball powder is great and others not so much. As I understand it there are two basic kinds of "ball" powder, one being a single base and the other double based and each will have different flame temps.
There are so many DIFFERENT factors that affect barrel life I don't think you can say that one powder or the other is directly responsible for wear, or not.
For some calibers ball powder is great and others not so much. As I understand it there are two basic kinds of "ball" powder, one being a single base and the other double based and each will have different flame temps.
There are so many DIFFERENT factors that affect barrel life I don't think you can say that one powder or the other is directly responsible for wear, or not.
bigedp51
The military uses ball powders because they burn slightly *cooler and the ease of loading by volume.
*Depending on deterrent coatings (burn rate) and nitroglycerin content.
"Much has been made about ball powders being cooler burning than extruded powders, but the fact of the matter is that there really isn't much difference. Flame temperature is very close to the same for all smokeless powders and runs about 3300 degrees F. Ball type powders tend to be from 3200 to 3300 degrees F and extruded powders tend to run 3300 to 3400 degrees F but there is wide variation."
A (Very) Short Course in Internal Ballistics
http://www.frfrogspad.com/intballi.htm
British Cordite powder was very hot burning and was not to be used in machine guns due to barrel wear. Cordite powder contained more nitroglycerin than many of todays double base pistol powders and "DID" wear barrels out much quicker. Todays double base rifle powders contain very small percentages of nitroglycerin and the deterrent coatings and additives make single and double base powders very close in peak flame temperatures. I use a lot of double base H335 and W748 in my AR15 rifles without complaint.
Below Cordite powder.
Catshooter
The M16 used the same ball powder used in the M14 rifle when it was first introduced a variation of Winchester 748. "BUT" the calcium used in this powder built up in the gas system of the M16 and caused just "ONE" of the jamming problems.
The main problem with the M16 rifle was the Army did not want to closed down Springfield Armory and turn over production of military rifles to civilian contractors. The Army did every thing possible to sabotage the production of the M16 rifle by Colt firearms. The Army sent 100,000 M16 rifles to Viet Nam for testing "WITHOUT" any cleaning equipment.
The Army kept changing the rifles specifications, two other firearms manufactures back out of their military production contacts and Colt almost went bankrupt. In the end it took Congressional investigations and intervention to straighten the mess out.
It is still a mouse gun and lacks punch and you should read more history about this rifle, I went in the service in 1969 and every M16 rifle I shot jammed and left a bad taste in my mouth about the military and contracting out.
It took me 40 years after I got out of the military and prodding by my two sons to "get modern" and buy my AR15 rifles. I'm still conflicted, every time I pull the trigger these rifles throw perfectly good brass away and make me go look for it. (and its still a mouse gun)
Some things never change.
*Depending on deterrent coatings (burn rate) and nitroglycerin content.
"Much has been made about ball powders being cooler burning than extruded powders, but the fact of the matter is that there really isn't much difference. Flame temperature is very close to the same for all smokeless powders and runs about 3300 degrees F. Ball type powders tend to be from 3200 to 3300 degrees F and extruded powders tend to run 3300 to 3400 degrees F but there is wide variation."
A (Very) Short Course in Internal Ballistics
http://www.frfrogspad.com/intballi.htm
British Cordite powder was very hot burning and was not to be used in machine guns due to barrel wear. Cordite powder contained more nitroglycerin than many of todays double base pistol powders and "DID" wear barrels out much quicker. Todays double base rifle powders contain very small percentages of nitroglycerin and the deterrent coatings and additives make single and double base powders very close in peak flame temperatures. I use a lot of double base H335 and W748 in my AR15 rifles without complaint.
Below Cordite powder.
Catshooter
The M16 used the same ball powder used in the M14 rifle when it was first introduced a variation of Winchester 748. "BUT" the calcium used in this powder built up in the gas system of the M16 and caused just "ONE" of the jamming problems.
The main problem with the M16 rifle was the Army did not want to closed down Springfield Armory and turn over production of military rifles to civilian contractors. The Army did every thing possible to sabotage the production of the M16 rifle by Colt firearms. The Army sent 100,000 M16 rifles to Viet Nam for testing "WITHOUT" any cleaning equipment.
The Army kept changing the rifles specifications, two other firearms manufactures back out of their military production contacts and Colt almost went bankrupt. In the end it took Congressional investigations and intervention to straighten the mess out.
It is still a mouse gun and lacks punch and you should read more history about this rifle, I went in the service in 1969 and every M16 rifle I shot jammed and left a bad taste in my mouth about the military and contracting out.
It took me 40 years after I got out of the military and prodding by my two sons to "get modern" and buy my AR15 rifles. I'm still conflicted, every time I pull the trigger these rifles throw perfectly good brass away and make me go look for it. (and its still a mouse gun)
Some things never change.
[br]bigedp51 said:
It is still a mouse gun and lacks punch and you should read more history about this rifle, I went in the service in 1969 and every M16 rifle I shot jammed and left a bad taste in my mouth about the military and contracting out.
I don't have one any more, Ed. I'll stick with my HK-91 and write off the brass.
[br]Take Ed's advice and read "The Black Rifle". It is a clear history of why we got what we did. The were more shenanigans that took place before the M-16 debacle and they are covered in other books from Collector Grade Publications for those interested.
Attachments
THANKS TO ONE AND ALL
Very informative and some good reading.
huck
Very informative and some good reading.
huck
IIRC somewhere I read that at the advent of ball powders, Olin (I think it was) poured a whole bunch of IMR 4895 into some sort of chemical bath which dissolved the stick powder into a slurry, and reconstituted it as ball powder. Now, I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure IMR 4895 is single base, so why wouldn't the resulting 748 produced in this manner also be single based?
I guess they could have added NG at some point in the process...
As for OP's question I have preferred stick powders since I was a pup, they just seem to work better for me than ball powders. That said, for blasting ammo I use Ramshot TAC (which was available some years ago at VERY favorable prices) in my 7.62 NATO rifles, where for my purposes "accurate enough" is well... accurate enough.
YMMV
I guess they could have added NG at some point in the process...
As for OP's question I have preferred stick powders since I was a pup, they just seem to work better for me than ball powders. That said, for blasting ammo I use Ramshot TAC (which was available some years ago at VERY favorable prices) in my 7.62 NATO rifles, where for my purposes "accurate enough" is well... accurate enough.
YMMV
bigedp51
Ball powders can be made from recycled powders and solid propellants. It is not something that has to be thrown away, and can be remanufactured as a cost saving method.
The Manufacture of Smokeless Powders and their Forensic Analysis: A Brief Review
"In the manufacturing process, smokeless powders are recycled and reworked (National Research Council 1998). When a powder within a batch is found to be unsatisfactory, it is removed and returned to the process for use in another lot. Manufacturers save money by recycling returns by distributors or the return of surplus or obsolete military powders. Hence, reworking and recycling the material assures good quality control of the final product, reduces costs by reusing materials, and reduces pollution by avoiding destruction by burning."
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/april2002/mccord.htm
5.56mm: DuPont, Olin andÂ…
The Great Propellant Controversy
A Tale of Unintended Consequences
The tide began to shift toward Ball powders in the '50s; indeed, in April 1954, the Chief of Ordnance wanted every small arms cartridge to be loaded with it. Declared "the greatest development in the field of explosives in nearly 100 years" by W.H.B. Smith, Ball powders offered significant strategic advantages. Its manufacture was significantly faster than other types. Before the Second World War, production of other types of gunpowder took nearly six months. During the war, DuPont was able to get the process for one IMR type down to two weeks. In contrast, Olin could complete a production lot of Ball powder in less than two days. More importantly, Ball powder could be stored longer than conventional smokeless powders. Excess acids left over from the manufacture of nitrocellulose cause gunpowder to deteriorate with age, and with age, even more acids are created during decomposition once stabilizing agents are overwhelmed. The manufacturing method for Ball powder was more efficient at eliminating the excess acids and preventing new acids from forming as the powder aged. In part due to this ability to remove and neutralize excess acids, the manufacture of Ball powder did not require virgin nitrocellulose, as did other gunpowders. Smokeless gunpowders of any type and most any age could be reused and recycled for their nitrocellulose. The manufacturing process for Ball powder was also safer as it took place almost entirely in water. If additional manufacturing plants were required for the expansion of gunpowder production or the replacement of powder mills lost due to accident, the manufacturing process for Ball powders required less specialized equipment. This would equate to faster construction and lowered costs for materiel and labor. Yet, propellants other Ball powders continued to be used in US military ammunition. For instance, when possible, Remington would load military ammunition with IMR powders, supplied by its parent company DuPont. Ammunition loaded with Ball, IMR, and other powder types were used interchangeably without incident in the full spectrum of US military small arms.
http://www.thegunzone.com/556prop.html
The military also tried experimenting using double base rifle propellants as farm fertilizers but the project ignited too much controversy. :
The Manufacture of Smokeless Powders and their Forensic Analysis: A Brief Review
"In the manufacturing process, smokeless powders are recycled and reworked (National Research Council 1998). When a powder within a batch is found to be unsatisfactory, it is removed and returned to the process for use in another lot. Manufacturers save money by recycling returns by distributors or the return of surplus or obsolete military powders. Hence, reworking and recycling the material assures good quality control of the final product, reduces costs by reusing materials, and reduces pollution by avoiding destruction by burning."
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/april2002/mccord.htm
5.56mm: DuPont, Olin andÂ…
The Great Propellant Controversy
A Tale of Unintended Consequences
The tide began to shift toward Ball powders in the '50s; indeed, in April 1954, the Chief of Ordnance wanted every small arms cartridge to be loaded with it. Declared "the greatest development in the field of explosives in nearly 100 years" by W.H.B. Smith, Ball powders offered significant strategic advantages. Its manufacture was significantly faster than other types. Before the Second World War, production of other types of gunpowder took nearly six months. During the war, DuPont was able to get the process for one IMR type down to two weeks. In contrast, Olin could complete a production lot of Ball powder in less than two days. More importantly, Ball powder could be stored longer than conventional smokeless powders. Excess acids left over from the manufacture of nitrocellulose cause gunpowder to deteriorate with age, and with age, even more acids are created during decomposition once stabilizing agents are overwhelmed. The manufacturing method for Ball powder was more efficient at eliminating the excess acids and preventing new acids from forming as the powder aged. In part due to this ability to remove and neutralize excess acids, the manufacture of Ball powder did not require virgin nitrocellulose, as did other gunpowders. Smokeless gunpowders of any type and most any age could be reused and recycled for their nitrocellulose. The manufacturing process for Ball powder was also safer as it took place almost entirely in water. If additional manufacturing plants were required for the expansion of gunpowder production or the replacement of powder mills lost due to accident, the manufacturing process for Ball powders required less specialized equipment. This would equate to faster construction and lowered costs for materiel and labor. Yet, propellants other Ball powders continued to be used in US military ammunition. For instance, when possible, Remington would load military ammunition with IMR powders, supplied by its parent company DuPont. Ammunition loaded with Ball, IMR, and other powder types were used interchangeably without incident in the full spectrum of US military small arms.
http://www.thegunzone.com/556prop.html
The military also tried experimenting using double base rifle propellants as farm fertilizers but the project ignited too much controversy. :
Looks like that cow is having a "blast" ;D
Ed, re ball powder's longer shelf life ....
I was asked around 10 years ago to break down about 1,000 loose and really old and scruffy US .30-06 military cartridges. Headstamp dates ran from the early 1930s to around 1943 and 44. This included maybe 150 M1 model 173gn FMJBT prewar rounds as a matter of interest, otherwise all M2 150gn ball. Anyway .... those loaded with IMR-4895 were in a really bad way with the powder reduced to a gelatinous corrosive slurry that was eating cases from the inside out. (Some pulled in two when pulling the bullet in a press with a collet puller.) 1943 dated Winchester M2s with early ball powder were superficially at any rate in perfect condition internally - no obvious powder deterioration at all, no dust, no acidic smell, clean brass. I collected 3 or 4lb powder and was very tempted to try some in 308W or similar, but then resisted the idea on the basis of why risk a rifle (and me!) with 60 year old powder. I still have it in some cans in the garage and occasionally make November 5th homemade fireworks with it in beer cans, where it burns fine.
I was very impressed by the obviously long shelf life of this powder type, especially as the cartridges had been stored in anything but good conditions given their outside appearance.
Re The Black Rifle ....
A great read. If you haven't got one or read it, I'd also recommend The Last Enfield by Steve Raw the retired Royal Marines chief armourer, also in the Collector Grade Publications series. This is the story of the current UK service rifle family, the disasttrous SA80 series. The disasters and mismanagement of the AR15 / M16 rifle pale into relatively minor significance compared to how the UK armed forces got their worst ever rifle. (So bad, only one small African country ever took any and that was only because they got then for nothing - even the Falklands Islands Defence Force rejected the rifle despite it being a British military outpost to prevent another Argentine invasion - they preferred to use their own short supply of money to buy Austrian Steyr AUGs rather than the parent country's weapon system!)
I was asked around 10 years ago to break down about 1,000 loose and really old and scruffy US .30-06 military cartridges. Headstamp dates ran from the early 1930s to around 1943 and 44. This included maybe 150 M1 model 173gn FMJBT prewar rounds as a matter of interest, otherwise all M2 150gn ball. Anyway .... those loaded with IMR-4895 were in a really bad way with the powder reduced to a gelatinous corrosive slurry that was eating cases from the inside out. (Some pulled in two when pulling the bullet in a press with a collet puller.) 1943 dated Winchester M2s with early ball powder were superficially at any rate in perfect condition internally - no obvious powder deterioration at all, no dust, no acidic smell, clean brass. I collected 3 or 4lb powder and was very tempted to try some in 308W or similar, but then resisted the idea on the basis of why risk a rifle (and me!) with 60 year old powder. I still have it in some cans in the garage and occasionally make November 5th homemade fireworks with it in beer cans, where it burns fine.
I was very impressed by the obviously long shelf life of this powder type, especially as the cartridges had been stored in anything but good conditions given their outside appearance.
Re The Black Rifle ....
A great read. If you haven't got one or read it, I'd also recommend The Last Enfield by Steve Raw the retired Royal Marines chief armourer, also in the Collector Grade Publications series. This is the story of the current UK service rifle family, the disasttrous SA80 series. The disasters and mismanagement of the AR15 / M16 rifle pale into relatively minor significance compared to how the UK armed forces got their worst ever rifle. (So bad, only one small African country ever took any and that was only because they got then for nothing - even the Falklands Islands Defence Force rejected the rifle despite it being a British military outpost to prevent another Argentine invasion - they preferred to use their own short supply of money to buy Austrian Steyr AUGs rather than the parent country's weapon system!)
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.