You guys gotta see this!

www.marlinowners.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=27612&sid=458b21197d78331cee9f6627962797dd

The guy used 48g of pistol powder instead of RL7. He lost two fingers an a chunk of his hand. I didn't realize useing the wrong powder made such a huge difference. I wonder if this should be a sticky for those new to reloading.

Bad boo-boo, he got off easy, relatively speaking.

I didn't realize useing the wrong powder made such a huge difference. I wonder if this should be a sticky for those new to reloading.

If you are reloading and did not know this; you need to immediately STOP reloading until you read and understand the introductory section of a good reloading manual. There may be some other things you didn't "realize".

Reloading can be safe but it is serious. You can kill yourself or others by not knowing what you are doing.

I knew the wrong powder was dangerous, but didn't know the pressure could jump from 30,000 cup to 250,000 cup.

So the mishap was caused when they substituted AA#7 for RL#7?

OOPSIE

Most folks are occasionally stupid...some have to work at it...others are just naturals. If the reloader is of the first type (which includes me), then the lesson learned will probably take.

Have to clean the iced tea off the monitor screen, Robert! :D

just think about this also, this is why you should never listen too ANYBODY about powder choices or charge weights without doing research from powder or bullet manufactures.
It can be a type error or a brain fart or just a person that has no common sense or a MORON thats giving you Info.These forums are a great wealth of knowledge but you need to still double check especially with powders! DON'T KNOW WERE THIS GUY MADE HIS MISTAKE but if you are going to play with things that go BOOM! you better make the right choices and smarten up!!

Reloading is serious business and is not dangerous if you follow the reloading manuals and use common sense. All the best...
Gil

He was lucky, I'd rather have half a finger and a tip than an eye or worse.

I do not believe the pressure got to 250,000 psi. It let go long before that.

Years ago I was two stations from a Rem 760 in 30-06 that went off like a bomb. Broke the guy's wrist and some splinters, but he was real lucky. I believe it was a double charge of 4064. He sent it to Remington and they wrote back and told him what powder, what bullet, and what happened, exactly. And offered to fix it for $100. He jumped on it, and we Know he got a different rifle back with just the old buttstock on it. The numbers on the serial # didn't look quite perfect. Suspect they remelted the old one and ran a new one thru the rollmarker. Can't do that stuff anymore. Fingerprinted bullets don['t cha know.

Hmmm. A double-charge of 4064 should not be possible in the '06. A normal charge fills the available powder space by about 90%. A double would overflow all over the place, which ought to signal the alert reloader that something was amiss. It must have been something else.

I believe manufacturers can still document the destruction of a receiver and re-issue the serial number on a same-model new one. I'm sure they have to follow the right procedure, and if that included providing Maryland with a new fired case, they could do so. Since most states don't have ballistic fingerprint systems, it would not generally be an issue.

The whole business of ballistic fingerprinting has proven to be surprisingly useless. The computer programs that compare recovered case and bullet data to that from samples taken at the time of manufacture get a lot of false positives as the database gets big. It turns out that while it is unlikely any two randomly chosen guns coming off the assembly line will leave identical ballistic marks on either cases or bullets, by the time you've made 10,000 of the same model, the chances each one has one or more near twins somewhere in the run is large. The computer software has not yet proven able to distinguish near twins. A human may be able to tell under the microscope, but they also may not. The marks change as guns wear, so you go from positive matching to "expert opinion" that two sets of marks "could have been" made by the same gun. There just isn't any gun DNA. And since most homicide detectives feel pressure to get a new case solved in the first 48 hours, they aren't generally interested in spending time chasing down a pile of false positives. As a result, they just ignore the system until they run out of other clues or options or are hoping to find corroborative evidence after already solving a crime. The only case of a crime being solved by the system in Maryland turned out to be incorrectly reported. It was a case of corroboration after the crime had already been solved.

You are probably right about the 4064 and the '06, as it was like 45 years ago and I have never reloaded that caliber, but I sure remember the incident. Every time I reload I remember that one and a couple of others. I did not know manudfacturers could legally remanufacture a serial number. I don't think bullet fingerprinting or even recording serial numbers on old form 44** whatever has ever really solved a crime. Corroborated maybe, as you said, but that's it. But the media and the rest of the gun haters don't care. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story/headline.

Wow. Just...wow. When my Dad was teaching me how to reload when I was in HS, there were a couple of things he would do.

1.) Reload according to the manuals ONLY (a side note to that, the firearms for specific loads were always considered too)
2.) Double check everything.
3.) Triple check everything.
4.) Pay close attention to what you are doing and don't get distracted in the process
5.) If you think for even a second that you haven't double and triple checked everything, go back and check again.

I can't believe that such a careless mistake like the one described in the initial post was made. Dad was always very serious about it and commented more than once that a screwup could result in dismemberment or death. That's why he never experimented outside of suggested loadings by the manuals with maybe the one exception being to go between two suggested powder charges for a specific bullet weight.

You got good advice, Patrick.

Wish more folks would follow the same rules.

. . . I can't believe that such a careless mistake like the one described in the initial post was made. . .

A men's room graffiti back in my college days read: "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity knows no bounds." Sounds like your dad understood that, and hence the redundant checking.

There is so much variability in guns and so many manual loads that have been reduced for liability reasons over the years, that there are many instances where sticking to manual loads is over conservative. But if you are not comfortable working with pressure signs and the like, then please stay with the advice not to. Better safe than sorry.

Nick - that's true. A good case in point would be some of my Dad's loads for 8x57. While I can't remember the specifics off of the top of my head, I can tell you that this load, intended for a Mauser 98 sporter, is considerably better performing than what's available commercially, which seems to top out at around 2300 fps. (His load pushes the bullet to 2650 fps)

Something else that Dad always did with his reloads was to mark the plastic CaseGuard case with a grease pencil to show bullet type/weight, powder type, powder charge, and the date reloaded - those bits of information at the very least. However, knowing that grease pencil can be wiped off, he also put a card with the same information written into the case itself. At times he'd add additional information such as approximate muzzle velocity and primer type/brand. There was never any question about what you were putting into your gun when you shot his reloads. It has only been recently that I have begun to really appreciate what he did and how he did it when it came to reloading.

I probably will get some criticism for this, but there are times when it is perfectly reasonable to exceed published maximum loads. My S&W 586 likes .357 mag. loads in .38 Sp. cases. That load was developed by Elmer Keith back in the days before the .357 Mag. Modern solid head .38 Sp. brass is plenty strong enough to hold up very well with magnum pressures. Don't ever try this in any old balloon head cases. Elmer Keith developed these loads only for the large frame S&W .38's (built on the .44 frame such as the S&W .38 Outdoorsman and .38-44 Heavy Duty).

Now, they should only be used in guns chambered for the .357 Mag. and never in .38 Sp. guns. Never the less. these 160 gr. LSWC bullets with 12.5-13 grs. of 2400 in .38 cases far exceed any loads in reloading manuals for the .38 Sp.case. But they are perfectly safe when worked up with care and caution for the .357 Mag..

The only reason that I bring this up is to show that there are exceptions to every rule. BTW, each box of this load that I load is clearly marked FOR .357 MAG ONLY. I don't usually recommend exceeding published maximums and wouldn't recommend this one for anyone who was uncomfortable using it. Of course this load has to be worked up just like any other load, watching for high pressure signs.

Rev

Rev:
<o>:p> </o>:p>
You need to be more specific, for safety’s sake. If you made up a 357 mag load in a 38 special case, and loaded it the same overall length as a 357, yes, the 38 special case is strong enough, and the load appears safe. If, however, you put the charge for the 357 case, put it in a 38 special case, and seated the bullet to the crimp grove, you have reduced the air space within the case by about 1/10”, which can then cause an overcharge.
<o>:p> </o>:p>
Darrel

Rev:
<o>:p> </o>:p>
You need to be more specific, for safety’s sake. If you made up a 357 mag load in a 38 special case, and loaded it the same overall length as a 357, yes, the 38 special case is strong enough, and the load appears safe. If, however, you put the charge for the 357 case, put it in a 38 special case, and seated the bullet to the crimp grove, you have reduced the air space within the case by about 1/10”, which can then cause an overcharge.
<o>:p> </o>:p>
Darrel

I thought I was fairly specific in that load of 12.5-13 grs of 2400 with a 160 gr. LSWC in a .38 Sp. case to be fired only in a .357 Mag. How much more specific could I be? Were talking magnum pressures in a .38 Sp. case. Not just dumping any old .357 load into a .38 case and cramming a bullet in on top of it. I agree that would be crazy.

What I was really trying to point out is, that there are times when published loading data for a specific case can be exceeded safely. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

Rev

I'm sorry, Rev. I wasn't specific enough. If you take your bullet/ powder combination, and stuff it into a 357 mag case, it should produce 357 mag pressures, regardless of which revolver you put it in. If you take the same bullet/ powder, and put them into a 38 special case, and seat the bullet to the crimp grove, giving it the same overall length as a 38 special load, the reduced air space within the 38 case will cause the pressure of the loaded 38 cartridge to be higher than the pressure in the 357 cartridge- regardless of what revolver it's fired in. You could be producing pressures considerably higher than appropriate for 357 cartridges.

Darrel

Smart Father!!!

For you, marking the ammo box may be good enough but personally I may unload my gun and fail to put the ammo back in that marked box. I often find a few cartridges in a coat pocket or in a pile on my bench and have no idea as to the load in that cartridge. If you only own .357s, no problem but I also have a .38 snubby and then it is very easy to slip those heavy loads into a .38 which may not be built to handle it.

For you, marking the ammo box may be good enough but personally I may unload my gun and fail to put the ammo back in that marked box. I often find a few cartridges in a coat pocket or in a pile on my bench and have no idea as to the load in that cartridge. If you only own .357s, no problem but I also have a .38 snubby and then it is very easy to slip those heavy loads into a .38 which may not be built to handle it.

That is a very good point. I own two .44 Mag. revolvers. In my S&W 29, I shoot only mid range loads 250 gr bullets at about 850 f/s. I also have a Ruger Super Blackhawk that I load full tilt with 250 gr bullets to 1400f/s. It's not that I'm afraid to shoot full magnum loads in the S&W, but that I prefer not to. I don't want to shoot the S&W loose with full magnum loads. I use the same 250 gr. hard cast LSWC's in each load usually. These rounds are indistinguishable visually.

Sometimes, especially after hunting season, I do find loose .44 Mag rounds in a coat pocket. I always pull at least one bullet from these rounds to see which load it is. Not so much for safety, but just to know for sure which load it is.

You are correct that I own no .38 Sp.'s, only a Colt Python and a S&W 586, so .357 mag. pressures are safe in all my pistols that will chamber it. I agree that this load may not be for everyone. As I said, the only reason that I mentioned it is to show that in at least some instances, published maximum loads can be safely exceeded.

Rev