Too Much Powder ?

[zimmerstutzen]

And therein lies the rub. No amount of testing or photos will ever convince a close minded person who so chauvinistically attacked every effort to show there may be unburned powder. As much as calls people liars when he kindly calls them "unpublished believers " So when a few people say Yup, I did it, suddenly it needs to be "Published" and apparently done by a non-believer, to be valid. That is until someone does it and publishes it and then apparently he'll argue that the laws of physics must have been artificially suspended for the test.

And yes, as I stated it does not matter whether burned in or out of the barrel or not burned at all. There comes a point at which additional powder obtains such a minor improvement down at the target, that it is a waste to go further.

 

[Black Hand]

And therein lies the rub. No amount of testing or photos will ever convince a close minded person who so chauvinistically attacked every effort to show there may be unburned powder. As much as calls people liars when he kindly calls them "unpublished believers " So when a few people say Yup, I did it, suddenly it needs to be "Published" and apparently done by a non-believer, to be valid. That is until someone does it and publishes it and then apparently he'll argue that the laws of physics must have been artificially suspended for the test.

Opinion is not fact and neither is belief. This seems to be a fundamental problem - I (and others) don't care what you believe, but what you can prove. Tell us your methods so that others can evaluate whether they are valid and show us your evidence so it can be evaluated as well. It doesn't matter who you are, assertions don't amount to evidence...

 

[Bad Karma]

Actually, there's lots of evidence that unburned powder is still present, which is the point of this thread. Enough evidence that Colerain Barrels talks of it on their website. I doubt it would cause increase in recoil. People have lots of opinions, but opinions aren't fact.

Regardless of what you believe wrt “unburned powder” the powder charge is a factor in the equation used to calculate recoil. Whether burned or blown out intact it’s a factor.

“The formula for recoil energy is simply E=1/2 MV Squared, with "M" being mass of the gun and "V" being the recoil velocity. In other words, you simply square the velocity of recoil, which is easily calculated when we know the weight of the bullet and powder charge and its velocity when exiting from the muzzle. Multiply by the weight of the gun and divide by twice the acceleration of gravity, and you get the recoil energy in foot pounds.”

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I did tell step by step what I did and the results Black hand, but you still choose to "disbelieve" despite the ones who have done the testing. You on the other hand simply go on saying that it is opinion despite the tests done. It is dishonest to claim that those who have done the test merely "believe". Even if I video'd the test and showed the results under a microscope, you would continue denying it like a member of the flat earth society.

 

[Carbon 6]

An experiment science does not make.

Thank you gentlemen.

 

[19 16 6]

What about the burning powder that comes out of the barrel after the ball.
It is not burnt in the barrel. It burns on the ground & catches the grass alight.
shparken shpitzen outen komen.

Zimmer, keep that mind of yours open when you next look at earth.

O.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Carbon 6 says: An experiment science does not make.

Spoken like another member of the flat earth society. All of the space photos, measurements and experiments showing the earth is a giant sphere are fakes. No one ever sailed around the world, etc etc.

 

[Black Hand]

I did tell step by step what I did and the results Black hand, but you still choose to "disbelieve" despite the ones who have done the testing. You on the other hand simply go on saying that it is opinion despite the tests done. It is dishonest to claim that those who have done the test merely "believe". Even if I video'd the test and showed the results under a microscope, you would continue denying it like a member of the flat earth society.

You'd need to provide more information - a single "experiment" unfortunately proves little. One of the hallmarks of science is "REPEATABILITY" - do you get the same/similar results when you perform the experiment several times (at least a minimum of 3 times for any sort of statistical significance). You are correct that I am skeptical, because that is what I should be. Your observation is, at best, interesting but hardly proves anything...

 

[Black Hand]

I did tell step by step what I did and the results Black hand, but you still choose to "disbelieve" despite the ones who have done the testing. You on the other hand simply go on saying that it is opinion despite the tests done. It is dishonest to claim that those who have done the test merely "believe". Even if I video'd the test and showed the results under a microscope, you would continue denying it like a member of the flat earth society.

And there are others that have done something similar and found NOTHING that would burn. Who should we believe? This is why the details of how something was done are important. You also earn NO points for insulting people...it is the equivalent of throwing a tantrum, drumming your heels and screaming " you MUST believe me, because I SAY SO..."

 

[Sparkitoff]

I just recently complete my own "experiment" regarding amount of powder. Once I found the right lube/ball/patch material combo that showed the patch was in excellent shape when recovered I upped the charge to see when the patch would "fail". I started with my usual load of 80 grain FFFg in my .54 caliber rifle. I went up to 120 grain of same powder. The recoil increased. Accuracy fell off at some point. The patches looked the same over the various amounts of powder. I thought that peculiar but it may have to do with the temperature. If the powder gets to the same temperature regardless of amount, then it would have the same affect on the patch, in this case no detrimental effect. If pressure increased, it was not enough increase to hurt the patch. If there was more "unburned" stuff from the powder I thought it might find its way around the patch or even through it. My experiment does not prove one way or the other that there is unburned powder or more of it with a larger charge. All it shows is that when the patch and lube is sound the patch will stand up to a lot of powder behind it. What will be interesting is if this is repeatable with another rifle or a different caliber. But then this becomes more about the patch/lube and less about the amount of powder that was burned or not.

 

[Carbon 6]

Carbon 6 says: An experiment science does not make.

Spoken like another member of the flat earth society. All of the space photos, measurements and experiments showing the earth is a giant sphere are fakes. No one ever sailed around the world, etc etc.

You call me a flat earhter, yet it is you who has conducted a simple observation (not an experiment). You observed the sun rising in the east and setting in the west after you learned that the earth was round and you concluded that the earth was at the center of the solar system.

You have wholley embodied what it means to be a flat earther.

 

[Zonie]

Seems to me that this topic has degenerated to the point that it provides no useful information so I'm closing it.