Thread: bolt failure P14

Originally Posted by Woody

@mucko. Out of curiosity; what projectile? -and was it seated deeper than previous tests? An unlikely cause in light of no previous pressure signs though.

127gr barnes LRX

Originally Posted by mimms2

Ah, quite right. My bad.

i will double check but think the chambering is a deep throat so the power doesnt burn out the lands so bad.

Originally Posted by Woody

@mucko. Out of curiosity; what projectile? -and was it seated deeper than previous tests? An unlikely cause in light of no previous pressure signs though.

thats the bit that haunts me mate, i cant find the evidence of the failure, only the discoloration of the steel where the bolt blew apart.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings Mucko,
Congratulations on your escape. Looking at your load of AR2213SC at 61 grains I wonder if you have been the victim of old data. Hodgdon has produced some modern data for the .264 recently in psi which shows 61 grains as near max for the 129 grains and way over max for the 140 grains. Nick Harvey was giving much higher loads at least up until his 6th edition which would be excessive to dangerous based on the current Hodgdon data.
Regards Grandpamac.

i checked the hodgdon data online its identical to ADI

Greetings Again,
I checked the Barnes on line data for the 127 grain LRX BT. They don't list H4831SC or H1000 (AR2213SC and AR2217 respectively) for that matter. They do list RL22 and IMR7828SSC (both slower than AR2213SC) at 58.3 and 56.0 grains max. The Hodgdon/ADI data is for the 129 grain Hornady Interlock. This is noted as a projectile developing less pressure than average while the Barnes projectiles develop notably more. Barnes even lists Retumbo (AR2225) at 62.7 grains max with the 127 grain LRX and this is way slower than AR2213SC. I am sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings but I think that the blow up was due to an overload. Barnes projectiles need special data with loading especially with the .264 Winchester which is known to be a bit grumpy at times. At least you didn't use Nick Harvey's 6th edition load of 68 grains. More than the rifle could have been scrap with that.
Regards and commiserations Grandpamac

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings Again,
I checked the Barnes on line data for the 127 grain LRX BT. They don't list H4831SC or H1000 (AR2213SC and AR2217 respectively) for that matter. They do list RL22 and IMR7828SSC (both slower than AR2213SC) at 58.3 and 56.0 grains max. The Hodgdon/ADI data is for the 129 grain Hornady Interlock. This is noted as a projectile developing less pressure than average while the Barnes projectiles develop notably more. Barnes even lists Retumbo (AR2225) at 62.7 grains max with the 127 grain LRX and this is way slower than AR2213SC. I am sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings but I think that the blow up was due to an overload. Barnes projectiles need special data with loading especially with the .264 Winchester which is known to be a bit grumpy at times. At least you didn't use Nick Harvey's 6th edition load of 68 grains. More than the rifle could have been scrap with that.
Regards and commiserations Grandpamac

it seams to be the case, by switching to the barnes projectile from nosler lr 129gr i did not check the barnes site which had new data, last time i was on there there was no load data which could of been years ago. its not very well known or articulated just how different barnes bullets are to lead core copper jacket. thankfully i can walk away from this wiser, and able to help others not make the same mistake. @gundoc i seams through poor research i overloaded the old girl.

@mucko I know you have posted load info in your original post and then bits thru the thread but would you mind reposting for both your previous load and the nasty Barnes stuff.

Also what is your barrel length, each load's catridge's OAL. I'm assuming you have jump as well?

Just playing with QL.

Greetings Once More Mucko,
I had the difference between the homogeneous and lead core projectiles recently when one of our club members had a near miss with his .260 rem with the same pill. He was about 2 grains over and his Sako escaped with no permanent damage. You mentioned a lack of pressure signs. Most of the standard ones such as primer appearance, bolt lift and ejector hole marks have been shown to be unreliable although some will dispute that. The best measure of pressure available to us mere mortals is the chronograph. Higher velocity means higher pressure. I use mine more and more. We are lucky that good modern pressure tested data is now available for the .264 due to Remington chambering it in their Sendero 700. Best of luck in your search for a modern action for your barrel. At least the Enfield barrel tenon gives you plenty of scope.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by zimmer

@mucko I know you have posted load info in your original post and then bits thru the thread but would you mind reposting for both your previous load and the nasty Barnes stuff.

Also what is your barrel length, each load's catridge's OAL. I'm assuming you have jump as well?

Just playing with QL.

i had used barnes before hand, then changed to nosler lr 129gr i had that load from 58.5-62.5gr in .2gr increments trim length 2.490 coal 3.184. i found nodes in the 59.5 and 61.5gr range. i then changed back to the barnes LRX
i (foolishly) did not check the barnes sight for new data. when i first built the rifle 6 years ago there from my recollection no load data (could be wrong) i have never successfully had the time to find a load to suit the rifle so it spend plenty of time hiding in the corner. if i did everything over and could advise anyone regardless of your powder recommendation check the requirement of the projectile maker.

Originally Posted by zimmer

@mucko I know you have posted load info in your original post and then bits thru the thread but would you mind reposting for both your previous load and the nasty Barnes stuff.

Also what is your barrel length, each load's catridge's OAL. I'm assuming you have jump as well?

Just playing with QL.

the load that blew it up was Barnes LRX 61.2Grs ADI 2213SC would have to measure a load but over all length was restricted mag box. there was heaps of jump about 200 thou.
can you check QL for loads using the same projectile in 6.6/06 using 2209

Originally Posted by zimmer

@mucko I know you have posted load info in your original post and then bits thru the thread but would you mind reposting for both your previous load and the nasty Barnes stuff.

Also what is your barrel length, each load's catridge's OAL. I'm assuming you have jump as well?

Just playing with QL.

26 inch barrel

Originally Posted by mucko

26 inch barrel

Will have a fiddle tomorrow arvo.

Anyone else out there able to run thru QL so we can compare results?

@mucko
2 QL images. The first using AR2213 which myself and some of my shooting mates know, well in QL at least, is not the same as AR2213SC.
Second image is Hodgdon H4831 which is AR2213SC.

Pretty basic analysis with more accurate results if measuring COAL and water capacity of a fired case.
QL can be brilliant or off the mark for some powders. Quite often you need to reverse engine QL to get relevant results ie fire a load, then adjust QL to match real world velocity.

So, what I have posted may not be gospel and other QL users may pick up something I have done wrong.

The pMax in QL is the max pressure rating of the cartridge case, not the action being fired. QL obviously has no idea of the strength of the action being used.

Did you have any velocities for your first shots fired?

The Rifle seems to be operating in the range of pressures it can hold ? . That being the 276 enfield and 30-06 , and there where a lot of 30-06 fired out of P17's .
So what the question is what happened to the case ? . Because it all seems to point to what Gundoc has said with maybe some sort of case failure / maybe oversized / oil on case / something which contributed as a catalyst . With age cracking just behind the bolt ?????.
So is there any pictures of the case ? .

Originally Posted by Tankd

The Rifle seems to be operating in the range of pressures it can hold ? . That being the 276 enfield and 30-06 , and there where a lot of 30-06 fired out of P17's .
So what the question is what happened to the case ? . Because it all seems to point to what Gundoc has said with maybe some sort of case failure / maybe oversized / oil on case / something which contributed as a catalyst . With age cracking just behind the bolt ?????.
So is there any pictures of the case ? .

And what about pics of the first (penultimate!) case fired? Any clues from that?