Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Handloader article: Cartridge Expansion

JB,

I read your article Cartridge Expansion in Handloader No. 288.

I always enjoy reading an article about pressure and the various ways of judging and measuring it. I enjoyed the article but have a question.

In your article you refer to Case Head expansion (CHE) and on page 50 your picture clearly illustrates a micrometer measuring Pressure Ring Expansion. (PRE).

On page 51 you refer to Ken Waters using CHE and then when describing his technique: �then measure the �Pressure Ring.�

When reading the Pet Load series of articles the reader is able to watch Ken Waters skill as a communicator develop and his technique as a handloader mature. Waters technique for developing pet loads evolved over a number of years with clear differences between the techniques used in his article for the August 1967 issue of Shooting Times �How To Develop Good Handloads� and in his article �Developing Pet Loads� for September 1982 issue of Handloader.
I agree with Ken Waters thoughts that CHE is difficult for the average handloader to use and the use of PRE (in conjunction with the use of a chronograph) to �Judge� pressure is easier to learn and perhaps more useful across a wider range of cartridges and firearms.



My question is simply about you use of the term CHE with reference to Ken Waters as he was pretty careful to describe his measurements as PRE..



.With winter restricting some of our outdoor fun it is interesting to dream of summer shooting and all of the pet theories we wish to test.

Anyone looking for winter reading on the subject of �Judgeing Pressure�

Earl Naramore: Handloaders Manual. CHE

Bob Hagel and Ralph Avery Handloader Mardch 1973. CHE

Neal Knox: How Much Pressure Handloader September 1973. CHE

Rick Jamison: Reading Pressure Signs The American Hunter February 1982. CHE

Michael W. York and Don Cantrell� Breech Pressure Breakthrough Gun Digest 1968 � One of my favorite articles on the measurement of pressure. This article clearly describes the limitations of the copper crusher method of measuring pressure and its usefulness when loads from the same test gun were compared to one another.

Phil Sharpe: The Complete Guide to Handloading.

Sorry I didn't differentiate enough between CHE and PRE for you, but the principles of using the results of either are the same.

I'll also note that as I have "matured" as a handloader, I've become convinced that a chronograph is a far more practical and accurate tool for judging pressures than any kind of cartridge measurement. That should have been obvious in the article. Plus, I've read several of the writings you suggest, as well as plenty of others on pressure "judging," and many theories have been proven highly speculative, if not downright false, by piezo-electronic equipment. I know a few people who knew Bob Hagel, and he actually bulged the chambers of more than one rifle.

I believe there is a big difference between CHE and PRE. Different tools should be used for the measurements and the average Handloader does not have the skills and experience necessary to accurately measure the changes in CHE. This was the only part of article I found unclear.
I agree the chronograph is the key tool for the Handloader in judging pressure. Later articles in Ken Waters Pet Loads series emphasized the use of the chronograph as a primary tool for the Handloader.
I assumed you had all of the articles listed. I imagined others might be interested in other writing on the subject and as other threads are running on essential reading I thought the list would prove useful. The statement in the breech Pressure Breakthrough article that crusher pressures measurements giving pressure estimates of up to 20% under actual pressure are common is enough to make a handloader who does not use a chronograph believe he is using Rocky Raabs �Chicken Entrails pressure guessing method.�
I enjoyed the article.

Actually, I did have a longer explanation of why Ken Waters suggesting using PRE in the original version of the article. As I recall, his reasoning was that the average handloader owns a caliper, and PRE allows a reasonable measurement with a dial caliper, if somebody doesn't own a micrometer.

However, the length of articles in most magazines has been shortened considerably in the past decade. Even when I first started writing for HANDLOADER 20 years ago 3000 words was probably average, and Ken Waters used to write much longer pieces. (Of course, he wasn't exactly a minimalist writer, never using 175 grains when one-hundred-and-seventy-five grains would fill more space.)

Today I'm supposed to submit a maximum length of 2200 words, and sometimes that's cut down a little at the head office. But I probably cut the PRE/CHE info down to a minimum myself, to make the 2200 word limit.

JB,
Thanks for the article, I really enjoyed it. I wish Handloader would allow more space for technical articles.

405wcf

I do to, I have read many articles that seamed that they were just starting to get to the meat of the subject just to be cut off like they weren't finished.

Where are y'all seeing #288 I'm only up to #287?

Mike

The reason most shooting and hunting magazines run shorter articles these days is less advertising revenue, which is what helps pay for printing pages in magazines. When there's less ad money, magazines cut back on the length of articles. It's that simple.

The reason for less advertising is Barack Obama: The perceived threat of new gun restrictions has shooters buying ammo, handloading components and firearms so fast manufacturers can't keep up. Consequently they don't need to advertise to sell their wares.

Complaining about shorter articles to magazine publishers isn't going to get results. You need to explain to Obama that his policies are creating a boom in the firearms industry that's cutting into the length of articles in shooting magazines.

I, too, sometimes feel like Handloader and Rifle articles are artificially cut short but JB sums it up pretty well I guess.

JB, you need to refer the Editor to this thread!

It's a circular argument, because old curmudgeons like myself don't buy magazines with half-finished articles.

How much advertising do they generate for magazines without readership?

Curmudgeon, out.

navlav8r,

The editor of any magazine doesn't have much if anything to do with choosing article length. Instead that's determined by what's generally known as the publisher, who's basically in charge of making sure the magazine makes a profit. Which means the basics of taking in money versus paying out money.

Income comes from advertising and subscriptions. Expenses are printing and mailing, websites, salaries of the people in the office (which include editors, secretaries, art directors, website directors and advertising sales people), office expenses (including rent or mortgage, power, computers, pens and pencils, etc.), and taxes. Oh, and paying the writers and photographers and artists who supply the content.

In other words, it's a business.

Am I missing something?

I'm only online mags which I thought were out before the printed ones

Mike

So you guys get paid?! THAT'S where the problem is!

also discussed in hodgdon data manual no.27

The earlier Speer manuals also had detailed information on CHE.

Its interesting the length of feature articles seem to have been cut in half.
I scanned the load development articles into word pad and did a word count. Ken Waters August 1967 article was 4,204 words without the picture captions.
The September 1982 Handloader article has 4221 words.
The circle of more people shooting for sport and self defense, then stocking up on supplies due to fear of Mr. BO, causing a shortage of �everything� which reduces the need to advertise, causing the magazines to reduce content and struggle to remain viable leaves people like me standing in the dust cloud as others swirl around us. I need to pay more attention. Next thing you know these youngsters will be hunting with AR 15�s�.

I look forward to a revised and expanded piece on pressure measurement in the book following the revised book emphasizing optics that should be out real soon now?

I trust Bob Hagel learned things about pressure I don't and will never know - just as I figure Bob Hagel knew things about stocking rifles that opinionated folks who didn't routinely in fact seldom if ever stocked a rifle might not truly understand. Good thing I'm not obliged to go along with the notion that harder brass is good for more pressure and I don't. But my point is more to wonder where are the new long pieces from major market folks like Knopf?


Kidding on the square though I don't understand why the changing periodical market has not opened a rush of longer format pieces in book, trade paperback, or magazine annual format?

Denton Bramwell has done more analysis of this than any human being that ever lived. He says PRE/CHE is dubious at best. As Denton says, it tells you something but you are never sure what.

He hasn't posted here in a while because both he and his wife have had medical issues. But he could explain the whole thing in more polysyllabic math terms than I could even invent.

Clark,

The other factor is the Internet. You'd think that since cyberspace is much less expensive than paper, ink and mailing, that longer articles would appear on the net. Some do, but most people regard the Internet as a free source of short info-bits, because anything that makes them read too long, or even think, makes them click to some other website. They want a simple answer, and they want it NOW.

The new optics book is started, and will be out early this fall. Am thinking about doing a bigger handloading book after that, with specific chapters on a bunch of cartridges, plus more in-depth info on pressure, brass, bullets, powders, etc.

MD, that's certainly good news.
I have fun reading magazine articles but do like to read more in-depth about some of the particulars. I also like it in my hot little hands for future reference. "Obsessions" gets pulled off the shelf for just such occasions.