This is the strangest thing I've ever experienced. I was trying out a variety of handloads in an Enfield revolver, cal. .38 S&W, 6 rounds of each load. Nothing unusual until the last load, 2.8 grains of Red Dot and a Remington 148 gr. hollow based wad cutter. Recoil was very light, as were all the previous loads, but the bullets were hitting in the dirt below the target and my Pro Chrono went blank after the first shot. "Oh well" says I, "that load is useless" so I just popped them off to empty the brass. I broke open the gun and looking through the bore I saw only a very small hole. A bullet had torn in half, leaving the hollow portion stuck in the bore while the nose of the bullet was gone. Returning home, I used a rod to drive the stuck bullet out of the bore and found the pristine Enfield barrel was bulged in two spots. Then by freak chance I found the bullet nose inside the cardboard box on which I had stapled my targets. The nose portion was damaged by impacting the dirt but one could still see where it had torn in half.
I had noticed nothing odd in firing those six rounds except that they were very weak and impacting quite low. Every shot threw up dirt so I had no idea anything might be stuck in the bore. I've never heard of anything like this before and really can't imagine how it could happen, but there it was.:confused:http://http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e245/coyotejoe/Mendoza1-1.jpg

What a terrible thing to happen to a nice gun. Sure feel for you Joe. It makes me glad I'm shooting solid base wadcutters. That's the first time I've heard of that happening. It must have been a mis-cast box of wadcutters with a very thin web in front of the hollowbase. I'd sure contact Remington about the problem, they may or may not help with your revolver, but I'd still pass on the info on to them.

Indeed, and I found that a sliver of lead had impacted the display box of my Pro Chrono so it is dead as well.

I had a gas check hit the display on my Pro-Chrono and killed it. Sent it in to get fixed and they didn't charge me a cent. Pretty good company.

Have read about it and even seen it happen back when there was a bunch or reported 2.7gr. of Bullseye "blow ups". One of the things found in some of the investigations was the possibility of HBWC's doing just what you had them do: seperate, blowing the nose secion out of the barrel and leaving the skirt wedged in the bore. USUALLy that requires either an oversized forcing cone or a rough barrel (or both) but leading can substitute for bore roughness.

Their opinion at the time was that certain brands of HWBs were mor prone to it than others...seemed to be related to the depth of the hollow base and the thickness of the skirt.

Sorry to hear of the accident.

----
BTW:

Can do it with .32HBWC's as well.

There use to be swage kits for making 1/2 jacket bullets, and Speer had (still has?) some 3/4 jacketed bullets for sale (and maybe Hornady if they still make their .308" 100gr.). Those also came with a warning about too low a vel. leaving the 3/4 jacket stuck in the bore with the lead core exiting the barrel. Never managed that trick with the Speer bullets, but did manage it with home-swaged 1/2 jackets.

It's a simple case of an excessive load. Even though Bullseye is a faster powder, it is digressive where Red Dot is progressive in burning characteristic, being intended for a wide projectile in a shotgun length barrel. The result is, Red Dot produces a much higher peak pressure. The classic .38 Special load for that wadcutter is 2.7 grains of Bullseye. The load produces about 11,000 PSI, which is what those sof swaged hollow-base wadcutter bullets are designed for. If you exchange that for 2.8 grains of Red Dot, you get almost 18,000 PSI. This is in a longer .38 Special case with the wadcutter bullet seated flush with the case mouth. If you go to the short .38 S&W case, but seat the bullet out to the maximum SAAMI COL of 1.24" the results are very similar, and the 17,000 PSI SAAMI maximum for that cartridge is slightly exceeded in QuickLOAD. If you seat it deeper in that little short case, pressure climbs rapidly in QuickLOAD's calculator. At one caliber of seating depth the pressure is at .357 Magnum level and way too much for that gun.

QuickLOADS calculator, however, assumes the bullet and case and the rest are too rigid to change dimensions. What has actually happened is the bullet skirt expanded out against the case wall in the chamber and the bullet acted like a pressure limiting burst diaphragm by stretching forward into the forcing cone while trying to drag the expanded skirt out of the case against its now-pressurized friction with the brass. It didn't succeed, and the bullet behind the bullet nose got stretched too thin to survive the trip down the barrel intact.

I know it has hard to believe such a light recoiling load could be doing all that damage, but you have to remember that even though the powder wasn't making much gas, it was doing it in a very small space. Just a bad combination and way more pressure than the bullet was designed for.

Now as odd as it sounds (mostly becasue I'm kind of conservative in my reloading) I've used 2.2 to 2.5 gr. of Red Dot in .38SW loaded with HBWC's. Difference being that I seat the bullets OUT in the case so that they end up just as long as when they are seated flush in a .38specail. Basically, want the same internal volume as a WC load in a .38specail.

Have no way of measuring pressure directly. If seated deeply to match .38SW length, pressure goes way up...if attempted to seat even deeper (more like a WC load) pressure goes WAY WAY up.

Glad unclenick supplied some numbers to go with those observations.

Yes, I should have mentioned that the bullets were seated out to crimp in the first lube groove, making a COL of 1.135" or almost exactly the same as if seated flush in a .38 special. My Speer manual lists a max load of 3.0 grains Red Dot with a 148 grain bevel base wadcutter, Lyman lists 2.8 grains with a 158 grain RN and I thought 2.8 grains with the 148 was conservative. The recoil and report were about like a .22, less than any other load tried, even including six rounds with 3f black powder which chronographed around 450 fps, so I was not surprised they were impacting in the dirt. And, since something did hit the dirt after ever shot, I never suspected anything remained in the bore. Oh, and yes, I did wet patch the bore after firing the six black powder rounds and it was spotless, bright and shiny when the HBWCs were loaded.
Another thing I found on opening the gun was perfect little rings of lead lying in two chambers, as if they had been shaved off by the chamber throat, little rings about as thick as heavy paper.
So Unclenick, do you think the bullets were being torn in half in the chamber and momentum carried the rear half two inches down bore? It would seem it must have been something like that. I guess Red Dot was the wrong powder for that application but it is listed in most manuals for handgun and even some cast bullet rifle loads and I have used it as such for many years without any problems. Jeeze, forty plus years of reloading and still lessons to be learned. I guess now I have an Enfield snubby!

Joe,

I think your surmise is correct. By the bullet skirt swelling out inside the case and chamber, it was going to take some effort to drag it out. I expect that once the barrel/cylinder gap was cleared by the separated nose, there was enough gas velocity from it escaping through that gap to relieve the friction and start the rings moving forward some of the time.

It is interesting what a close call this is. If doing as Ribbonstone suggests, seating to a COL of 1.145" (.38 Spl case length), 2.0 grains of Red Dot is fine and is in the same pressure ballpark as 2.7 grains of Bullseye would produce with that bullet seated in a .38 Special case. The database in QuickLOAD seems to think the .38 S&W has a thicker head, because same COL seating produces higher pressure in the .38 S&W in its calculations. That is likely to be a matter of what brands of cases were measured for the database, since the SAAMI and the CIP don't specify case internal dimensions. The Bullseye load gives about 50 fps more velocity from a 5" barrel in this comparison (765 fps v. 714 fps), BTW.

If the case head dimensions happen to be a match between your .38 S&W and standard .38 Special cases (and if they are the same brand, they probably will) then 2.5 grains of Red Dot (Ribbonstone's second load) at 1.145" COL raises pressure about 3,500 PSI higher than the Bullseye load, (14,500 or thereabouts) which is a bit warmer than the bullet was designed for, but at <20% increase is within reasonable design limit expectations and probably not enough to cause issues. It is that extra 0.3 grains and 0.01" deeper COL that make the big pressure jump to above the SAAMI maximum of 17,000 PSI. If you have a .38 S&W case with the lower volume that the QuickLOAD database has listed, QuickLOAD thinks you could be 22,250 PSI to 25.500 PSI at 1.135" COL, depending on what assumptions I make about the volume of the hollow base. The bullet will have given way before that. As I said, actually reaching those pressures would assume the bullets didn't change shape under pressure, as these obviously did.

A couple of points come out of looking at this problem: As you observed, choice of powder is more than just energy content and burning rate. Bullseye is obviously safer in a tiny powder space, with its slight digressivity. The Red Dot, on the other hand, because it produces higher peak pressures earlier in the firing cycle, will burn more consistently and produce less velocity extreme spread in a short barrel, like a snubby. Ironic, since it was originally intended for shotgun barrel length. You just have to be willing to give up a few fps off maximum velocity and be more conservative loading it, since the usual scale variation of +/- a couple of tenths of a grain can make quite a difference in pressure values in little short cases with this powder. Personally, I would not be running Red Dot over that first 2.0 grain load that Ribbonstone suggested, unless I were weighing the individual charges or knew I had a larger case volume than the QuickLOAD database shows for .38 S&W (12 grains water capacity; 23.1 grains water capacity for the .38 Special).

If either of you or Ribbonstone want to check case water capacity in your .38 S&W cases, I would be interested to learn what they are and what the case brands are? I have an Excel file with instructions for figuring case water capacity. You can download it from my file list at:

http://www.drop.io/unclenick

If you don't have Microsoft Office, I've checked that the file opens and runs correctly in the free Open Office Suite's spreadsheet program, Calc. That office suite is available at:

http://www.openoffice.org/

Lastly, you suffered an unfortunate lesson in the individual nature of bullet shapes. Loading all bullets of the same weight with the same charge is not a safe practice, obviously. The idea comes from looking at loading manuals where the manufacturer is showing his bullets of different shape, but of the same weight and same basic construction (all jacketed, for example) all using the same load data. Peak pressure is dependent on the empty volume the powder burns in, and if you seat a .224" bullet a little deeper in a capacious .220 Swift case, you don't need to alter the load for safety because the powder space hasn't been changed by a big percentage. If you are loading a short, straight wall case, though, a little bit of seating depth can change the powder space percentage quite a bit, and COL becomes critical dealing with maximum loads.

For example: A standard .45 ACP 230 grain hardball load is 5.0 grains of Bullseye and it produces a peak pressure of around 17,000 PSI. Push the bullet in just 1/8" deeper, as a truncated cone shape will let you do, and the pressure jumps to 23,000 PSI. +P+ and not likely to damage most modern guns, but not desirable for a steady diet, either.

Sorry about the Enfield. I wondered if you might be able to find a replacement barrel at Numrich, but didn't see one there. If the bulging is not really obvious on the outside of the gun without measuring it, and if the barrel thread dimensions allow, I think I would bore the barrel out and ream it for a .38 cal liner. Done with a bit of care, that would preserve the original appearance and sight radius. You would also have the opportunity to go to a rate of twist that stabilizes wadcutters better. Say, 14".

BTW, if you cast, the Lee Tumble Lube .38 wadcutters are the most accurate I've ever shot, including beating Federal match wadcutter loads by a significant margin. That is true in both my Dan Wesson .357, and in a Smith K-38 target model I own.

IF i were to load the .38SW today, would avoid the HBWC's and keep loading levels very low. NOTHING you can safely do is going to get it our of it's "weight class"....gaining 10 for 15% vel. at the expensive of high pressure isn't going to get it up to .38specail levels.H
There is one in my safe...given by a freind no longer in need of it. Old gun, nearly mint condition, still smokeless era but not abundantly strong. have two boxes of "full bore" loads, all using the old-style 158gr. Swaged RNL bullet and a slightly compressed load of FFFg. When i do shoot it for fun, will be loaded with 9/10ths gr. of Bullseye (becasue that's about as low as my measure will consistantly toss) and a OOO buckshot.

I'd be willing to bet that .36 bore had something to do with the wadcutter seperating. the skirt probably swelled out to .36 but the solid front could not voila seperation. if you look hard enough you can find some .36 diameter bullets here.

CoyoteJoe try shooting it with the bulges if they are not really bad. I had a nice S & W model 10 that I fired a round behind a reload without powder. I was rapid shooting and didn't stop in time. Bulged the barrel real good about a 1/2 inch behind the front sight. I Magna-fluxed the barrel and then shot it on paper. Shot nearly as good as it did before but about an inch high and to the left about an inch and easy to compensate for.

I'd be willing to bet that .36 bore had something to do with the wadcutter seperating. the skirt probably swelled out to .36 but the solid front could not voila seperation. if you look hard enough you can find some .36 diameter bullets here.

Could be, but the recovered bullet nose had rifling marks which looked to be as deep as those on the skirt, no point in miking it as it had impacted a rock.

[quote=ribbonstone;350468]IF i were to load the .38SW today, would avoid the HBWC's and keep loading levels very low. NOTHING you can safely do is going to get it our of it's "weight class"....gaining 10 for 15% vel. at the expensive of high pressure isn't going to get it up to .38specail levels.H
quote]

Agreed! the top load I was able to chronograph ran a 158 JHP to about 550 fps, the Winchester factory loaded 145 grain RN went just under 600 fps. You mentioned in an earlier post that this had been known to happen with oversize forcing cones. This Enfield has a very large and abrupt forcing cone and that could indeed be where separation took place.

Unclenick, thank you very much for the enlightenment, I just never would have thought that possible. I doubt that relining would be feasible, that flat sided Enfield barrel is very thin on the sides and that is where it bulged, quite noticeable by sight or touch. The old gun was no collectors joy, pretty much devoid of any finish and while they do have some history behind them and are "kinda neat" in their own way it really was no great handgun and I didn't have much invested in this one. I'll look for a barrel but won't be on pins and needles while waiting.

[quote=ribbonstone;350468]IF i were to load the .38SW today, would avoid the HBWC's and keep loading levels very low. NOTHING you can safely do is going to get it our of it's "weight class"....gaining 10 for 15% vel. at the expensive of high pressure isn't going to get it up to .38specail levels.H
quote]

Agreed! the top load I was able to chronograph ran a 158 JHP to about 550 fps, the Winchester factory loaded 145 grain RN went just under 600 fps. You mentioned in an earlier post that this had been known to happen with oversize forcing cones. This Enfield has a very large and abrupt forcing cone and that could indeed be where separation took place.

had something like your experience happen loading 100gr. HBWC in the .32SWL. Loads i had worked up for a S&W 30 never gave me a problem. Same ammo in a different revolver (Colt 3" D.S....they did make some in .32) jammed up soild...was traced to the hollow base (seperated as yours was) stuck in the forcing cone. If it hadn't stuck at the forcing cone, I'd have fired a second round behind it and rung the barrel as you did.

The offending gun had a larger, more abrupt forcing cone than the S&W. My guess is that the hollow base did what it was designed to do, and expanded..but it expanded in the forcing cone, and the easier way out was to seperate rather than swage the expanded base back down.
-----
The rumor about the .32 Detective specials is that they wre made (at least at first) for new York...in the belief that women detectives couldn't handle a full .38. A bit of 1960's sexisim.

FYI, Ken Waters took pictures of the same thing happening for one of his "Pet Loads" articles. Forget exactly what he was working on, but believe it was an overseas surplus Ruger police gun, perhaps not in .38 special but in something close.

There is a picture of the skirt stuck in the forcing cone.

Approximately in 1977 I experienced similar thing a couple times. I was shooting a Tingle .44 percussion rifle with minnie style slugs and a fair load of black powder. Luckily I detected it because I marked my ramrod to ensure I was seating slugs all the way down on the powder. I soaked the powder with water through nipple hole, pulled breach plug and the skirt was visible under the second slug.