|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088 |
Funny you should ask that, because if you knew jack [bleep] about propellant chemistry, you'd know that temp stability and nitroglycerin content has been an issue all the way back to Alfred Nobel trying to pawn Ballistite off on the French government in the 1880s. They were't as foolish as he'd hoped, spotted the stability problem, and stuck with the single base nitrocelulose Poudre B and thus got the first working smokeless cartridge. The Italians were more gullible and bought Nobel's mistake and lost 5 years jacking around with it until they invented Solenite which is still laughably unstable by modern standards but at least could be used. So the role of nitroglycerin content has been understood for right at about 130 years now. Except by you. I guess some subjects just aren't covered in clown college  Your "history lesson" sounded like something off the internet. So, I Googled the topics and guess what... http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2017/02/smokeless-powders-cordite.htmlYou took credit, didn't give any. Not surprised. Generally with "scientific" discussions, one footnotes or gives credit for quotes. DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483 |
What some fail to realize, is that aside from the well-established smokeless powder chemistry being so flippantly thrown around, powder geometry also plays a role in temperature stability. Recent advancements in smokeless powder include new geometric approaches (like cylindrical shells), as well as modern chemical additives such as different and perhaps more effective de-coppering agents.
It is certainly an overly simplistic and narrow-minded approach to make all assertions of the temp-stability of various smokeless powders based solely on the basic chemical composition of a particular powder (the standard nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin bases), without also considering powder geometry, bore-to-powder volume ratio, pressure curve characteristics, bullet weight, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088 |
What some fail to realize, is that aside from the well-established smokeless powder chemistry being so flippantly thrown around, powder geometry also plays a role in temperature stability. Recent advancements in smokeless powder include new geometric approaches (like cylindrical shells), as well as modern chemical additives such as different and perhaps more effective de-coppering agents.
It is certainly an overly simplistic and narrow-minded approach to make all assertions of the temp-stability of various smokeless powders based solely on the basic chemical composition of a particular powder (the standard nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin bases), without also considering powder geometry, bore-to-powder volume ratio, pressure curve characteristics, bullet weight, etc. About as much physics as chemistry. And powder coatings have come a long way. Technology has advanced a bunch since Cordite. DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,023
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,023 |
It is certainly an overly simplistic and narrow-minded approach to make all assertions of the temp-stability of various smokeless powders based solely on the basic chemical composition of a particular powder (the standard nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin bases), without also considering powder geometry, bore-to-powder volume ratio, pressure curve characteristics, bullet weight, etc.
Jordan if I'm not mistaken, his assertions weren't based solely on chemistry, there was that extensive testing he did using a single bullet in a single chambering.
A wise man is frequently humbled.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088 |
It is certainly an overly simplistic and narrow-minded approach to make all assertions of the temp-stability of various smokeless powders based solely on the basic chemical composition of a particular powder (the standard nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin bases), without also considering powder geometry, bore-to-powder volume ratio, pressure curve characteristics, bullet weight, etc.
Jordan if I'm not mistaken, his assertions weren't based solely on chemistry, there was that extensive testing he did using a single bullet in a single chambering. My issue with LB is his over reaching, didactic, authoritarian statements and claims that are outliers from accepted norms. That RL-26 is the most temp sensitive power doesn’t square with conventional knowledge. Now temp sensitivity, from what I understand, can vary a great deal depending on application. I agree that the Extreme series is very temp stable, no doubt better than RL-26, but there are more temp sensitive powders, IMO. Then there was LB’s historical treatise on early smokeless powders, regurgitated thought for thought from the internet link I posted with no credit given. So, how much of his other stuff is of similar origin. We’ve seen that kinda behavior here before. So, based on style and content, I’m not convinced until shown otherwise. Mark me as skeptical. DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 14,483 |
These days it's easy to look like an expert, with the Google-machine close at hand...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 37,088 |
These days it's easy to look like an expert, with the Google-machine close at hand... Evidently... DF
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,086
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,086 |
The one I really like is "proving" RL-26 was really temp-sensitive, first by simulating results indoors with a really light bullet in the .264--when a bunch of shooters have found 26 very stable when chronographed in ACTUAL field conditions with heavy-for-caliber bullets in cartridges from the .243 on up.
Then he "backed up" his claim by citing QuickLoad. Now, I have nothing against QL, having used it since it appeared. But even the directions for QL state that actually testing is preferable.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,638
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 8,638 |
The one I really like is "proving" RL-26 was really temp-sensitive, first by simulating results indoors with a really light bullet in the .264--when a bunch of shooters have found 26 very stable when chronographed in ACTUAL field conditions with heavy-for-caliber bullets in cartridges from the .243 on up.
Then he "backed up" his claim by citing QuickLoad. Now, I have nothing against QL, having used it since it appeared. But even the directions for QL state that actually tested data is preferable. Damn John, thought you were above petty sh*t like this. Sad
Swifty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,239 |
What's wrong with stating a fact Swifty, which is all MD did there, and he's 100% correct. Everyone knew LB was a dumbass so MD was actually being nice about it. Just like he was to you when you became one of the only people on the planet that couldn't figure out how to use Bore Coat.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 23,506
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 23,506 |
The one I really like is "proving" RL-26 was really temp-sensitive, first by simulating results indoors with a really light bullet in the .264--when a bunch of shooters have found 26 very stable when chronographed in ACTUAL field conditions with heavy-for-caliber bullets in cartridges from the .243 on up.
Then he "backed up" his claim by citing QuickLoad. Now, I have nothing against QL, having used it since it appeared. But even the directions for QL state that actually tested data is preferable. Damn John, thought you were above petty sh*t like this. Sad Swift, this was not even close to “petty”, but rather furthering a point that the poster in question was narrow, biased, and conceited. 😎
Curiosity Killed the Cat & The Prairie Dog
“Molon Labe”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,023
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 46,023 |
The one I really like is "proving" RL-26 was really temp-sensitive, first by simulating results indoors with a really light bullet in the .264--when a bunch of shooters have found 26 very stable when chronographed in ACTUAL field conditions with heavy-for-caliber bullets in cartridges from the .243 on up.
Then he "backed up" his claim by citing QuickLoad. Now, I have nothing against QL, having used it since it appeared. But even the directions for QL state that actually tested data is preferable. Damn John, thought you were above petty sh*t like this. Sad No, what's sad is your tirades about your "negative experience" and unanswered emails on a discontinued inexpensive bore coat product. Ironic that a guy who's been pissing and moaning for weeks about such a trivial thing would take someone to task for being petty.
A wise man is frequently humbled.
|
|
|
|
|
154 members (41rem, 2ndwind, 10gaugemag, 338reddog, 450yukon, 1_deuce, 23 invisible),
2,043
guests, and
1,014
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,387
Posts18,469,706
Members73,931
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
