Wads for Smokeless Loads for the 1876

[OKDEE]

I was searching through the backlog of messages on crimping 45-60's and noticed a note about not putting a cardboard wad in with the reload.

I do most of my 45-60, 45-70 and 45-75 reloads with a Buffalo Arms Low density poly wad.  For me, I seem to be getting a better grouping. 

What do you all do? As far as wads and smokless powders go?

Cheers,

Oklahoma Dee

[john boy]

What do you all do? As far as wads and smokless powders go?

Dee, I've never used a wad with a smokeless powder reload

[Grizzly Adams]

Hi, Dee.

Many years ago, I used a little tuff of that poly stuffing in my 45-70.   Honestly don't recall if it made much difference.   I stopped using it because I read somewhere that  it could result in ringing a barrel and/or excess pressure.  

Now days, I just stuff the whole case full of BP and use a thin over powder fiber wad to protect the base of he bullet.

[Hobie]

I was searching through the backlog of messages on crimping 45-60's and noticed a note about not putting a cardboard wad in with the reload.

I do most of my 45-60, 45-70 and 45-75 reloads with a Buffalo Arms Low density poly wad.  For me, I seem to be getting a better grouping. 

What do you all do? As far as wads and smokless powders go?

Cheers,

Oklahoma Dee

I am anti-filler with smokeless loads.  I use a powder that gives a load density that doesn't require a filler OR black or Pyrodex. 

[OKDEE]

Thanks John Boy!     Why not use a wad?

Thanks Grizzly,  But what is ringing of a barrel and how can a thin round plastic build up excessive pressure? 

If you are using a wad on BP, why not on smokeless?  Is it not the same concept?  You are trying to reduce the impact on the base of the bullet?! 

Hey Hobie, I am not using a filler, just a wad.    I'm kinda against filler myself.

Oklahoma Dee

[Trailrider]

Howdy, Pard,
The use of a wad between the powder and the base of the bullet IN BLACK POWDER LOADINGS is to (1) take up space between the powder and the base of the bullet when a reduced load is used; and/or (2) to protect the base of the bullet from the low-order explosion produced by BP.  In point of fact, allowing the base of a SOFT lead bullet to be expanded may not be a bad thing with original barrels that may be oversized.  There must NEVER be an air space between the powder and the bullet in a black powder loading.  The bullet acts like a temporary obstruction and a pressure wave can result in a bulge in the barrel (or even a BURST barrel), sometimes called a "walnut" or "ring", from the expansion of the barrel!

Smokeless powder acts differently from black powder in that it burns rather than "exploding".  Most smokeless small arms powders are "progressive-burning", i.e., the higher the pressure, the faster the burning rate, and the faster the burning rate, the higher the pressure.  This is fine as long as we do not create situtations where the bullet or a filler acts like an obstruction, sending pressures exponential, and resulting in damage or destruction of the gun, ranging from ringed barrels to destroyed guns!

In cartridges originally designed for black powder, e.g., .44-40, .45 Long Colt, .45-70, etc., with a straight-sided, or straight-taper or slightly bottlenecked (NOT a pronounced one with a shoulder), the amount of smokeless powder seldom fills even half the powder space.  With reduced loads this means a LOT of space in the cartridge for the powder to move around, and even loads that produce BP equivalent velocities, the powder seldom fills half the available space.  As a result, the powder can slop around, assume different orientations, and the result MAY be inconsistant ignition by the primer.  There is definitely a correlation between powder positioning and pressure and velocity.  This isn't so important if the powder position is consistant, such as when shooting a single-shot rifle, as the cartridge can be tipped nose up to settle the powder against the primer before carefully inserting it into the chamber, or nose down for that matter.  But, in revolvers, and repeating rifles, the recoil of the previous shot(s) can change the powder positioning in subsequent rounds, resulting in somewhat less consistancy.  This is on reason that so many LONGRANGE shooters stay with black powder.

Attempts to use fillers to hold smokeless powder charges back against the primer have met with mixed results.  I have, for many years, used 1/4 or 1/2 (depending on the case capacity versus powder volume) sections of toilet tissue, with a fair amount of consistancy, and no problems with ringed barrels.  The tissue must NOT be packed down on the powder, but inserted into the case just far enough that the bullet then seats/compresses it.  The tissue tends to burn, though NOT always completely, and can thus be a fire hazzard in dry grass or brush!  Others have used polyester fiber tufts, and other products.  LOADS MUST BE REDUCED when a filler is used, as the decreased space in the case increases the burning rate of the powder!

So far as WADS under the bullet base are concerned, I have never found them necessary in either pistols or rifles.  Where I feel I need to protect the bullet base at all (sometimes in .45-70 or .45-90), I have gone to gas checks on the base of the bullet.
The problem with a wad, even if seated by the bullet, is there is a potential for the wad to be jarred and fall into the space between powder and bullet.  If this happens, there is definitely the possibility of the bullet acting like an obstruction, and the wad acting like a bullet, and KA-BOOM!   

A gas check won't do that.  But you need a special bullet mould or bullet, designed for a gas check.  The little copper cup is inserted into the BULLET-SIZING die on your lubricator/sizer, or you can press them onto the base of the bullet or tap them on with a padded mallet.  The Hornady gas checks have a taper to the lip, which locks the check onto the bullet's base.  (At least they used to when I laid in my supply, years ago.)  The Lyman gas checks don't have the lip (or didnt' back then), and might fall off after the bullet exits the gun.  Might make a bit of difference accuracy-wise, but I couldn't ever detect it.

With the advent of bulkier, special-purpose smokeless powders, Trail Boss for pistol and pistol/rifle cartridges, and 5744 in rounds like .45-70, as well as older powders that can be used in higher-velocity loadings (where the rifle will handle them safely), there is little reason to use fillers, AND ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO UTILIZE WADS under bullets.  And DEFINITE REASON NOT TO!

Ride careful, Pard!

[Grizzly Adams]

Howdy, Pard,
The use of a wad between the powder and the base of the bullet IN BLACK POWDER LOADINGS is to (1) take up space between the powder and the base of the bullet when a reduced load is used; and/or (2) to protect the base of the bullet from the low-order explosion produced by BP.  In point of fact, allowing the base of a SOFT lead bullet to be expanded may not be a bad thing with original barrels that may be oversized.  There must NEVER be an air space between the powder and the bullet in a black powder loading.  The bullet acts like a temporary obstruction and a pressure wave can result in a bulge in the barrel (or even a BURST barrel), sometimes called a "walnut" or "ring", from the expansion of the barrel!

Smokeless powder acts differently from black powder in that it burns rather than "exploding".  Most smokeless small arms powders are "progressive-burning", i.e., the higher the pressure, the faster the burning rate, and the faster the burning rate, the higher the pressure.  This is fine as long as we do not create situtations where the bullet or a filler acts like an obstruction, sending pressures exponential, and resulting in damage or destruction of the gun, ranging from ringed barrels to destroyed guns!

In cartridges originally designed for black powder, e.g., .44-40, .45 Long Colt, .45-70, etc., with a straight-sided, or straight-taper or slightly bottlenecked (NOT a pronounced one with a shoulder), the amount of smokeless powder seldom fills even half the powder space.  With reduced loads this means a LOT of space in the cartridge for the powder to move around, and even loads that produce BP equivalent velocities, the powder seldom fills half the available space.  As a result, the powder can slop around, assume different orientations, and the result MAY be inconsistant ignition by the primer.  There is definitely a correlation between powder positioning and pressure and velocity.  This isn't so important if the powder position is consistant, such as when shooting a single-shot rifle, as the cartridge can be tipped nose up to settle the powder against the primer before carefully inserting it into the chamber, or nose down for that matter.  But, in revolvers, and repeating rifles, the recoil of the previous shot(s) can change the powder positioning in subsequent rounds, resulting in somewhat less consistancy.  This is on reason that so many LONGRANGE shooters stay with black powder.

Attempts to use fillers to hold smokeless powder charges back against the primer have met with mixed results.  I have, for many years, used 1/4 or 1/2 (depending on the case capacity versus powder volume) sections of toilet tissue, with a fair amount of consistancy, and no problems with ringed barrels.  The tissue must NOT be packed down on the powder, but inserted into the case just far enough that the bullet then seats/compresses it.  The tissue tends to burn, though NOT always completely, and can thus be a fire hazzard in dry grass or brush!  Others have used polyester fiber tufts, and other products.  LOADS MUST BE REDUCED when a filler is used, as the decreased space in the case increases the burning rate of the powder!

So far as WADS under the bullet base are concerned, I have never found them necessary in either pistols or rifles.  Where I feel I need to protect the bullet base at all (sometimes in .45-70 or .45-90), I have gone to gas checks on the base of the bullet.
The problem with a wad, even if seated by the bullet, is there is a potential for the wad to be jarred and fall into the space between powder and bullet.  If this happens, there is definitely the possibility of the bullet acting like an obstruction, and the wad acting like a bullet, and KA-BOOM!   

A gas check won't do that.  But you need a special bullet mould or bullet, designed for a gas check.  The little copper cup is inserted into the BULLET-SIZING die on your lubricator/sizer, or you can press them onto the base of the bullet or tap them on with a padded mallet.  The Hornady gas checks have a taper to the lip, which locks the check onto the bullet's base.  (At least they used to when I laid in my supply, years ago.)  The Lyman gas checks don't have the lip (or didnt' back then), and might fall off after the bullet exits the gun.  Might make a bit of difference accuracy-wise, but I couldn't ever detect it.

With the advent of bulkier, special-purpose smokeless powders, Trail Boss for pistol and pistol/rifle cartridges, and 5744 in rounds like .45-70, as well as older powders that can be used in higher-velocity loadings (where the rifle will handle them safely), there is little reason to use fillers, AND ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO UTILIZE WADS under bullets.  And DEFINITE REASON NOT TO!

Ride careful, Pard!

Excellent explanation.   

Okee, "ringing a barrel"  means a break in the inside surface of the bore of the rifle, usually produced by a "excess pressure event" - like an obstruction in the bore.

[Hobie]

Thanks John Boy!     Why not use a wad?

Thanks Grizzly,  But what is ringing of a barrel and how can a thin round plastic build up excessive pressure? 

If you are using a wad on BP, why not on smokeless?  Is it not the same concept?  You are trying to reduce the impact on the base of the bullet?! 

Hey Hobie, I am not using a filler, just a wad.    I'm kinda against filler myself.

Oklahoma Dee

Filler or wad, what's the difference?  Potential bore obstruction or acts as bullet striking bullet which acts as bore obstruction.  In all cases, to function properly, the wad/filler MUST contact the base of the bullet at all times to avoid this.  Indeed, sometimes a gap is unavoidable.  The wad/filler strikes the base of the bullet now acting as bore obstruction and we have ringing.  Noticeable?  Perhaps not, perhaps not for a while. 

In the old days many target shooters shot such loads and seated the bullets either from the muzzle or breech separately from the cartridge.  There was ringing but as it was at the base of the bullet/mouth of the cartridge it neither affected extraction nor did the bullet have to pass over it and become deformed.  Some barrels with a ring/bulge still shoot well, but...  Why risk it for no practical reason?

[OKDEE]

Thanks for the input!!

I think I will adjust my wad-age useage!   

Cheers,
Oklahoma Dee

[larryo_1]

I don't know what the flap is about here.  If you don't want to use wads that should be up to the individual shooter.  They can cause problems.  I have used a tuft of kapok -just enough to keep the powder on the primer when I use 3031 in my big bores.  Have done this for over 40 years with no rings, no problems.  The other powders I use, I don't.  I found that with 3031 if i don't tamp down the kapok on the powder then there is lots of unburned stuff on the ground in front of the muzzle.  For your edification, I do this with my 45-90 and my 40-82.  Must work as there has been alot of meat made with these calibers loaded this way. 

I suppose that the best advice that I can pass on is that if you are in the least bit nervous don't!  I have never shot reduced loads of BP  but would tend to agree with the advice on that. Sooo,

[Grizzly Adams]

I don't know what the flap is about here.  If you don't want to use wads that should be up to the individual shooter. 

I suppose that the best advice that I can pass on is that if you are in the least bit nervous don't!  I have never shot reduced loads of BP  but would tend to agree with the advice on that. Sooo,

No flap really, just the continuation of a very long debate within the shooting fraternity.   I agree, it is up to the individual shooter based on his own experience.

[Hobie]

I don't know what the flap is about here.  If you don't want to use wads that should be up to the individual shooter.  They can cause problems.  I have used a tuft of kapok -just enough to keep the powder on the primer when I use 3031 in my big bores.  Have done this for over 40 years with no rings, no problems.  The other powders I use, I don't.  I found that with 3031 if i don't tamp down the kapok on the powder then there is lots of unburned stuff on the ground in front of the muzzle.  For your edification, I do this with my 45-90 and my 40-82.  Must work as there has been alot of meat made with these calibers loaded this way. 

I suppose that the best advice that I can pass on is that if you are in the least bit nervous don't!  I have never shot reduced loads of BP  but would tend to agree with the advice on that. Sooo,

Not a flap to me.  As Mr. Adams says, it is a personal choice.  I choose not to use a wad (or other fillers) with smokeless powders.  I feel that a wad seated between the bullet and compressed powder (which will likely be BP) has little opportunity to move and that this is borne out by over a 100 years of shooting.  The wad then may be more a benefit than a liability.  I don't begrudge anyone's choice to do as they please with their own guns.