443 ft-lbs for a brass rem58 8" barrel. Am I crazy?

[arcticap]

-Rem 1858: 360.6 m/s, 601 Joules!! (1182 ft/s, 443 ft/lbs)
-Walker: 436.1 m/s, 880 Joules!!! (1430 ft/s, 649 ft/lbs)
-Rem 1858 Carbine: 453.9 m/s, 954 Joules!!!! (1488 ft/s, 703.6 ft/lbs)

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=602885

There's a post by McGunner where he chronographed a load of 777 in his Ruger Old Army behind a 220 grain Lee cast conical at 1300 feet per second.
He stated that load produces 825 foot pounds.
According to the Google conversion:

825 foot pounds = 1 118.54981 joules

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6317129&postcount=1

...Next up, and the biggest shocker, the ROA. Now, normally it shoots around 900 fps with Pyrodex P. NOT with 777. Shots ran 1300 fps... Yep, you heard right, and recoil was such with those little crappy plastic grips I have on it, I'm going to put that fugly Hogue grip my son-in-law gave me for the gun on it. It was hurting my hand with that faux checkering those cheap grips have. It shot well, its normal 2" groups, but now this is shooting a 220 grain Lee cast conical. Folks, that's 825 ft lbs! MY GAWD, that's right up there with my .45 Colt Blackhawk shooting 2400 behind a 300 grain bullet, the vaunted "Ruger only" stuff. That gun has a short barrel, 1120 fps with a 300 grain XTP, but I only get 1200 fps out of a 7" contender barrel with it. Now, that's 1000 ft lbs in the Contender, but shy of 900 in the Blackhawk....

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=508449&highlight=as+much

 

[darkerx]

Thank you, but I knew this thread already... ROAs are nice, but have a modern design... And 777 is not a real black powder.

I would be curious to try a full load of 0b in it, though...

 

[PTK]

ROAs might as well be modern, yep. I don't see how that compares with this directly, but it's still quite a result... too bad Ruger stopped making those beasts, they just made them to never break.

 

[darkerx]

ROAs are modern weapons... 777 is a modern powder... Reaching high performance levels is the least you can expect.

I'm more impressed by 150 years old designs, firing black powder made with 150 years old tools, and still reaching 'not too bad' performance levels.

 

[arcticap]

If 777 is more potent than Swiss, then the manufacturers must be recognizing that they do need to accommodate the approved powders that are on the market by insuring that they have an adequate built in margin of safety for overloads. Even if the recommended 777 loadings of 15% less are exceeded they can still fit into the revolver chamber. That's just like with any muzzle loading rifle that can be double loaded by the operator's mistake at any given time.

I'm not sure if 777 is more potent than the Swiss priming powder or not, but MCgunner's result showed that more foot pounds were produced than in Darkerx's Walker/Swiss/round ball test.

The Walker may still be able to match or exceed that Ruger power level if loaded with enough 777 and the same 220 grain slug.
The point is that Darkerx's proof load in the Walker may not have produced any greater pressure that what any other consumers have produced when using 777 in their Walkers.
I guess that would depend on which projectile is being loaded.

 

[SwampMouse]

By the way, I reached a french proofhouse technician, and they use full loads of swiss to proof black powder revolvers... An other point is that they would have to drill some holes in my gun to insert pressure sensors, to give me readings of pressures during a shot.(it annoys me a little...). Next week his manager will be back to study how it should be possible to create 'overpressure' while using only black powder.

darkerx,
I think that's interesting. Are the French really that backwards that they still have to drill holes to measure pressure? The rest of the world has been measuring pressure with sensors glued to the outside of barrels and chambers since the 70s. Are you sure that's what he told you? I can give you the name of a pressure measuring system you can buy yourself. We used them for well head testing and the same company makes a unit just for firearms. With this unit you can do all of the pressure testing yourself and you can post it for us. Then you will have better equipment than the proof house you told us you contacted. You can get a complete wireless measuring system that uploads to a notebook computer for less than $800. You can also tell the French proof house about it and they can enter the 21st century too.
SM

 

[darkerx]

@arcticap: I agree with you, 777 looks more potent than even 0b... Which should demonstrate that swiss 1 is safe.

@SwampMouse: I confirm what I have been told on the phone... Holes. Do you have a link for your device?

 

[mykeal]

Reaching high performance levels is the least you can expect.

What is your definition of 'high performance levels' in a black powder revolver - in particular, what metrics do you use?

 

[darkerx]

ROA were designed as 'caps&balls' devices without all the flaws remaining in good replicas. Then reported accuracy is better, treatments are better, frame is stronger, smokeless has been taken into account durring the design, adjustments are better, etc.
Mechanical and chemical losses have been reduced=>performance is better.

 

[SwampMouse]

@SwampMouse: I confirm what I have been told on the phone... Holes. Do you have a link for your device?

Darkerx,
I am an auxiliary sheriff's deputy and our department uses a couple of testing companies for forensic data and testing of our internal larger weapons. This is the one we use for our sniper and support weapons.
http://www.dtbtest.com/weapons-testing.aspx
As you can see they can do almost anything, but we are considering doing more of our own testing including pressure testing.
Several of us work or worked in the oil patch and we had experience with field portable well head testers made by the company the guys that wrote the software and designed the data loggers RSI sells.
http://shootingsoftware.com/pressure.htm
It's amazing the French proof houses don't have something so affordable and also so readily available. If you look at the list of commercial, military, agency and individual shooters you can see they are widely used because of their cost.
http://shootingsoftware.com/site.htm

When you get one you can include it in the pictures of your guns and testing that you are going to post for us.
SM

 

[darkerx]

SwampMouse,

I think RSI products are interesting, but as a matter of fact, this is a light solution, for users that don't want to scratch their beloved guns and will be fine with estimated pressures. Proofhouses will make direct measures of the pressure, whatever the material... When RSI has to know what kind of material they are measuring the stretching of... to extrapolate a pressure.

It's the value for the customer, which will define an acceptable price on any market... That's why this solution is cheap.

 

[mykeal]

darkerx: Please answer my question:

What is your definition of 'high performance levels' in a black powder revolver - in particular, what metrics do you use?

 

[darkerx]

@Mykeal: energy, momentum, accuracy for a given load... And from what I have read on the forums, with the same loads (quantity of powder+type of bullet), the ROAs are beyond the other C&B ... Which means a better performance for a weapon.

Do you have other criteria?

 

[mykeal]

Sir: criteria are specific values, including units and error bands. Energy, momentum and accuracy are generic parameters, not criteria - all guns have those qualities in some amount. So far, it appears you want me to conclude that the Ruger Old Army is your definition of high performance. That's fine, but it doesn't answer the question. You're the one who said,

Reaching high performance levels is the least you can expect.

So you must have some idea what those levels are, what are they? Whether I have the same or different criteria isn't the question.

I don't know how to be more clear; why won't you be specific as to the metrics you use in judging performance? I ask one final time: specifically, what metrics (parameters AND values) do you use to define high performance?

 

[SwampMouse]

SwampMouse,

I think RSI products are interesting, but as a matter of fact, this is a light solution, for users that don't want to scratch their beloved guns and will be fine with estimated pressures. Proofhouses will make direct measures of the pressure, whatever the material... When RSI has to know what kind of material they are measuring the stretching of... to extrapolate a pressure.

It's the value for the customer, which will define an acceptable price on any market... That's why this solution is cheap.

Darkerx,
If you're having trouble understanding the English on the RSI site I can help you, just tell me which parts you're not understanding. You are underestimating the capabilities and what people use the data logger for. Did you look at the list of users?
[URL="http://shootingsoftware.com/site.htm"]http://shootingsoftware.com/site.htm[/URL]
Which of those users are light users as you call them? Which of those governmental agencies are worried about scratching their beloved guns as you call them? You are acting like the RSI system is a toy. These users aren't amateurs looking for approximate results, they are looking for hard cold facts.

I used to use the same pressure data loggers made by Southwest Products almost daily and I can assure you they are not toys. The only difference between the loggers that RSI sells and the pressure loggers we used is the software.

Let me know what it is you are having problems understanding on the RSI site and I can explain it to you.
SM

 

[arcticap]

Here's a reply to a question about using 4F in C&B revolvers instead of 3F.

Well this one forced me to dig out the old first edition Lyman BP handbook. In that book they did test 4f in all calibers of revolvers. There really is surprisingly little difference in velocity and pressure between 3f and 4f. To take just one example at random:

In the 1851 Navy with .375" balls, 20 grains 3f gave 967 fps with a pressure of 8,300 LUP.

20 grains of 4f gave 1006 fps with a pressure of 8,460 LUP

Now with the 150 grain conical bullet pressure did jump. With that bullet 15 grains 3f gave 668 fps with a pressure of 8,500 LUP.

15 grains of 4f gave a velocity to that bullet of 787 fps at a pressure of 11,200 LUP.

With the exception of that one conical bullet they show very little difference between 3f and 4f in .31, .36 and .44 revolvers. In some instances 4f actually produced slightly less pressure than 3f.

SO THERE I've waited years for a chance to use that icon. :Laugh:

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/257347/post/new/#NEW

The thread can be accessed by following my personal referral link for free registration to the Muzzle Loading Forum:

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/index.php?referral/4225/

 

[darkerx]

@mykeal: I should answer ' 2" groups with 1000joules is high performance' ... But your question is just irrelevant... And not worth wasting my time.

 

[darkerx]

@SwampMouse: the pressuretrace solution gives a good view of the evolution of the pressure during a shot... BUT doesn't provide an actual measure of the pressure: when you measure your own temperature, you can do it by checking your skin... But they won't use this way in hospitals.

 

[SwampMouse]

@SwampMouse: the pressuretrace solution gives a good view of the evolution of the pressure during a shot... BUT doesn't provide an actual measure of the pressure: when you measure your own temperature, you can do it by checking your skin... But they won't use this way in hospitals.

Darkerx,
Why do you refuse to accept you get real time pressure measurements from the RSI system? It does record actual measurements of pressure. I can state that as a fact, I used the exact same hardware with software for oil field use. The box is simply a data logger, it records the information from the pressure sensors. That information is sent to the computer where it gives you graphs of time and pressure, just like wellhead data.
I don’t know what the hospitals use in Europe, but you are wrong about hospitals in the U.S. My sister in law is a nurse in a pediatric care unit and according to her they use surface scanning a lot now and it is growing
Do you really think people drill holes in weapons these days to measure pressure? You would destroy them. What do you think those sensors were that used to be put down those holes, they are just a different form of pressure sensor. In the old days they used lead and copper crushers with special pressure barrels to measure pressure then they went to sensors down holes, now they use sensors mounted on the surface.
You obviously haven’t looked at the list of users in the link I provided to RSI page. Those aren’t a bunch of hick amateurs darkerx. Those people could get any system they wanted, at almost any cost.
SM

 

[darkerx]

RSI don't use pressure sensors at all... They use strain gauges.
They don't measure pressures, they measure the stretching of some material.
Then, they measure a system: "pressure stretching some material", which is different from the pressure alone. Then it gives an idea of what the pressure should be... But it doesn't respect at all the standards to measure a pressure.

BTW... Yes in industry we destroy prototypes to validate hypothesis. As C&B are only for fun, I won't invest.in destructive tests.
(and not in RSI solution, as I don't know what kind of steel has been used for my chambers... And worse, I don't have a reference to calibrate the system (required for octogonal barrels).)

 

[junkman_01]

This thread is getting awfully tiresome. :banghead:

 

[darkerx]

Lol... That's the reason why most people keep thinking the same... Too tiresome to search...

 

[junkman_01]

Actually I meant you are getting tiresome.

 

[darkerx]

@junknan: Thank you. Reading this from YOU is incredibly pleasurable.

 

[SwampMouse]

RSI don't use pressure sensors at all... They use strain gauges.
They don't measure pressures, they measure the stretching of some material.
Then, they measure a system: "pressure stretching some material", which is different from the pressure alone. Then it gives an idea of what the pressure should be... But it doesn't respect at all the standards to measure a pressure.

BTW... Yes in industry we destroy prototypes to validate hypothesis. As C&B are only for fun, I won't invest.in destructive tests.
(and not in RSI solution, as I don't know what kind of steel has been used for my chambers... And worse, I don't have a reference to calibrate the system (required for octogonal barrels).)

Darkerx,
I'm not an engineer, but I remember what I was taught and it isn't the material strength of steel that makes the most difference in the amount the valve or pipe will expand under pressure, it is the wall thickness and the diameter. I am certified in the use of the pressure testers. The strength determines when the steel will fail and also how much it won't spring back. There are a couple of moduluses we input as material factors that are more important than the hardness or strength when measuring pressure. Those modulus numbers are almost identical for all steel. You won't have to worry about what steel those Italians used. If you were measuring on iron castings or brass then you would plug in a new factor, but for any magnetic steel it was the same for everything.

One more thing about pressure sensors. Not all of them but a lot are actually strain gauges. They aren't mounted on the materials they are mounted in housings that you screwed into the ports. And you can mount them on your octagonal barrel too.

You seem to be finding lots of reasons why those testers won't work. Did you ever look at the list of users RSI provided? Maybe I should contact the FBI and the Navy and the Army and U.S. Army Proving Grounds at Aberdeen and Remington and Savage and all of the others and tell them they are wasting their time because there is a guy who says they don't work, or they are just toys. They could have probably saved a lot of time if they had spoken to you first.
SM