GunAuction Forum - .7-30 WATERS

| (Forum Home)--->(Reloading)--->(.7-30 WATERS) |
|
| (Start a Thread) (Forum Rules) |
| Seller: oldmanjeffers(221-0-0) | Post#1 - Posted: 10/21/2011 at 19:31:52 |
|
|
(Fastest to Slowest)
Here are a few links to some burn rate charts http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html http://www.reloadbench.com/burn.html http://home.hiwaay.net/~stargate/powder/powder.htm http://www.varmintal.com/pburn.htm
|
| Seller: oldmanjeffers(221-0-0) | Post#2 - Posted: 10/21/2011 at 19:32:25 |
|
|
Some interesting reading
Why Powder Burn Rate Is Meaningless Perhaps you have looked at various "Burn Rate Charts" and wondered what good they are. Well, you have good reason to wonder. Burn rate charts seldom agree. There is no specific meaning for "burn rate," so it shouldn't surprise us that the numbers don't agree. They mean nothing by themselves. What amateurs call burn rate is not used by professional ballisticians to develop loads. The actual term closest to burn rate used in interior ballistics is "Relative Quickness." Relative quickness is defined by "closed bomb tests," which quantify pressure rise in a sealed container. However, professional ballisticians do not use relative quickness for load development, either. A closed bomb relative quickness value does not translate into any type of value outside of that 'closed bomb' test. Powder performance varies widely by actual application. Relative quickness is one of several preliminary considerations when assessing a powder's suitability for a particular application by ballistics, but nothing more than that. Relative quickness does not tell use the physical shape of a powder, its composition, or the types of coatings. It cannot tell us whether a powder is single-based, double based, or triple based. It does not tell us the heat of explosion, the progressive / degressive gas creation values, the ignition characteristics, and so forth. There is no way to translate a double-based powder performance into a single-based powder performance level with any accuracy. Even further, relative quickness does not define the erosiveness of a powder, the residue left by a powder, its ability to meter properly; and on it goes. Energy content of nitrocellulose varies by manufacturer. It varies by the amount of nitrogen in the nitrocellulose. The more nitrogen, the more gas a powder can make. Once you have a specific type of nitrocellulose the energy content is further controlled by the addition of nitroglycerin, which is basically what constitutes a double-based powder. Now you have further considerations, as nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin do not behave the same way as temperature changes. The amount of nitro percentage varies by powder to powder, and with it its performance in a specific application. All this combines to make burn rate charts something to ignore, or to view with very little importance placed on them. Professional ballisticians do not use them at all, simply because they have no particular meaning. Ping-Pong balls are nitrocellulose, but not many of us would bother cutting them up and attempting to use them in a firearm. |
| Thread Admin: kraiger(46-0-0) | Post#3 - Posted: 10/22/2011 at 12:11:07 |
| (no avatar) | Thanks OLDMANJEFFERS I ran a copy of all the info you sent I am going to take and have it laminated in plastic so I can keep it on my loading bench. I loaded some shells up with 28.7 grains reloader 15 and 160 grain bullet of unknowen brand. Loaded one shell went outside and fired it then loaded up 50 more now all got to do is fire them. I had bullet touching rifling good and tight when closed action. |
| Seller: RobW(128-0-0) | Post#4 - Posted: 10/23/2011 at 20:55:16 |
| (no avatar) | Seems like I heard about shooting factory 223s in a 7-30 Waters barrel to get fire-formed brass. |
| Seller: tomon(71-0-0) | Post#5 - Posted: 10/24/2011 at 06:58:53 |
|
|
Rob.... It's 30-30 necked down to 7mm. 223 just might have a tendency to split a little bit, if it would fire at all, being rimless. |
| Thread Admin: kraiger(46-0-0) | Post#6 - Posted: 10/24/2011 at 07:32:11 |
| (no avatar) | ROB you are thinking of the .7 MM TCU that is what the shell that you would start with there. But thanks for the input. |
| Thread Admin: kraiger(46-0-0) | Post#7 - Posted: 10/25/2011 at 16:57:27 |
| (no avatar) | After running brass in FL sizer die. I used some Remington 140 grain sp bullets and 31.5 grains reloader 15 powder to fireform the Remington .30-30 brass I had to make .7-30 waters brass works very nice. Did not see any pressure signs. I also used some 160 grain bullets of a unknow kind with only 28.7 grains of powder. Those were the starting loads in the Hornady 7th edition reloading book out of the handgun section. |
| Seller: RobW(128-0-0) | Post#8 - Posted: 10/26/2011 at 18:59:36 |
| (no avatar) | Thanks kraiger, drat these pesky brain cramps! |
| Buyer: DTimm(0-0-0) | Post#9 - Posted: 10/27/2011 at 18:06:18 |
| (no avatar) | I am the proud owner of both a savage and stevens bolt actions in 30-30. but who really needs 2 30-30s. what might be involved in rebarrelling one of them to 7-30waters? |
| Buyer: DTimm(0-0-0) | Post#10 - Posted: 10/27/2011 at 18:07:55 |
| (no avatar) | P.S. is 7-30waters the only caliber based on 30-30? |