| Westley375 |
| (.300 member) |
| 19/04/08 01:56 AM |
Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Over on Accuratereloading.com some guy says he ruined his Krieghoff barrels by using foam filler plugs....has anyone heard of such a thing? Doesn't foam "burn away before it even reaches the bullet? I shoot reduced loads all the time so I can have all the fun without the bruises and get similar accuracy to Hot Loads up to 80 yds. I think it was "pilot" error. Wrights book says there can be problems but doesn't says you'll blow your barrels apart...
| 500Nitro |
| (.450 member) |
| 19/04/08 02:21 AM |
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Well I think you should include what Powder was used as well
and just how little he was using.
I do not know the powder involved so am not going to name or comment on it -especially since it is all up on AR.
I made my views known on AR - "Fill it up and let her fly".
I just don't fathom why we need all this airspace and fillers.
NitroX
|
| (.700 member) |
| 19/04/08 02:25 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Foam in my loads often just flies out mostly undamaged. For it to stay in the barrels or whatever I can really see how that could happen.
I believe there have been cases where the foam has been old ie in the cases a long time. Or has become compressed.
Not an expert. Just what I have read.
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 19/04/08 02:34 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Fillers were at one time seen to be the solution to cast and reduced load finickiness.
Then maybe 20 years ago, reports indicating ringed barrels etc surfaced with enough regularity that the use of fillers of any kind were commonly discouraged in the gun press. I ceased using them for my purposes and I know many others did also.
Having read of enough troubles caused by the use of fillers I won't use them, but it seems there are some folks on this Forum that continue to use them and so far I have not read of any reports of damage coming from them. Maybe those who use them can weigh in and give their experiences.
| Anonymous |
| (Unregistered) |
| 19/04/08 05:17 AM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
I know Ross Seyfried is not a big fan of foam fillers either, though I have never had any problems whatsoever using them. Sounds like a powder issue.
| Huvius |
| (.416 member) |
| 19/04/08 05:27 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
In the most recent Double Gun Journal, Sherman Bell is using Hodgdon Trail Boss powder that is less dense, so fills a larger case better, with good results.
I will try this powder in my 360 No.2 and perhaps avoid the filler question altogether.
| Anonymous |
| (Unregistered) |
| 19/04/08 05:28 AM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Please let us know how it works. I was also enlightened by that article.
| Paatti |
| (.333 member) |
| 19/04/08 05:51 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Those Cas powders might be a answer to reduced loads for big cases.
Is there any other than Hodgdon Trail boss and Vihtavuori Tin star ( N32C )
I normally use Vihtavuori 300 series powders without filler for reduced load in my 9,3x62 rifle.
| new_guy |
| (Sponsor) |
| 19/04/08 08:15 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Quote:
Over on Accuratereloading.com some guy says he ruined his Krieghoff barrels by using foam filler plugs....
That's not entirely accurate. The gest is that he didn't use enough foam, or shouldn't have been using foam with the 5744 powder, or both.
Only one plug on top of 45gr of fast-burning powder (I believe) demonstrates Wright's Secondary Projectile Effect.
Here's the post. You decide.
I just got a call from a guy in California who loaded 45gr of Accurate 5744 with 1 Kynoch foam wad under a 500gr cast bullet in his 470.
Although he'd shot 50 or so of the same rounds, the result of "the one" was a pair of Kreighoff 470 barrels that separated at the breech end.
The guy that called me was the owner of the rifle. He was also the guy that loaded the ammo, and he was the guy that pulled the trigger.
He pulled the trigger on the reduced load, the gun doubled with excessive recoil. He could not get the gun open after firing. He took it to a gunsmith, who had to pry the barrels open. The right barrel cartridge was separated, but the left barrel cartridge looked fine.
The gun was sent to Kreighoff. Krieghoff said the barrels were separated at the breech and that the action would have to go back to Germany for inspection before they would consider putting new barrels on it.
Obviously, one foam plug was not enough filler for such a small amount of powder (see Graeme Wrights' explanation of the "Secondary Projectile Effect.")
However, Accurate also indicates that no filler is necessary with 5744 loads. Either way, the barrels (and likely the action too) are toast.
Just don't want to see anyone else repeat this exercise.
| new_guy |
| (Sponsor) |
| 19/04/08 08:16 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Here's a relavant paragraph from Wright's book:
“One of the major problems with wads occur if they are loaded in such a way as to leave an airspace between the wad the base of the bullet. What is believed to happen is that as the powder ignites, the wad accelerates inside the case before the projectile moves. When the wad hits the stationary projectile it creates an area of high pressure and may cause chamber ringing of the area of the bullet base. The projectile effectively acts as an obstruction. This phenomenon is sometimes called the secondary projectile effect; the wad acts as a second projectile inside the case.”
| DUGABOY1 |
| (.400 member) |
| 19/04/08 09:17 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Gentlemen, New Guy is correct, the wad was not the problem all by it's self! The problem is that 5744 powder is not a powder that can be used with filler, of any kind! 5744 powder is a silly speciality powder that is to be used in very large cases on NE cartridges, and carries a warning of "NOT TO USE FILLER". The fault is not the wad, but the Crap-Wad that did not follow the rules with 5744 powder.
With any powder that doesn't fill the case with a load that is needed to replace the old CORDITE, (excepting 5744 which is not to be used with wads of any type) can be used with the proper aplication of a filler. The key to this damage is two fold was the powder used, and the way the powder was held in place with the filler. Firstly no filler was indicated with 5744 powder, but even above that the 5744 charge was so small, the the filler had to be pressed down on the charge, leaving a lot of airspace between the powder and the bullet. This is a disaster wiating for the trigger to be pulled. The damage was not caused by the powder, or the filler, but by the idiot that placed them both in the same case.
When a substitute powder for Cordite is used, the modern powder will rarely fill the case up enough to make it work well without a filler of some type. However, the filler has to be properly used, regardless of which filler is used. The proper load method is load powder the charge in the case, and then the filler is also added on top of the powder, and just enough so as to be slightly compressed by the seating of the bullet, and no less, or more. No airspace between the bullet, and the filler is allowed.
It makes no difference if the filler is Kapoc, Polyfiber, or foam plugs, but wat does make a great difference is leaving air between the filler, and the bullet, OR USEING A FILLER WITH 5744 POWDER!
Gentlemen it is irresponsible to condemn the filler, the powder, or the combination of the two without knowing all the facts. This thread is how urban legends start, that condemn any practice unjustly! I'm sure if Krieghoff is told the whole story on this damage, there will be some strong language passed along to the owner of this rifle! This guy just may have gotten a $12K lesson in proper handloading of double rifles!
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 19/04/08 09:30 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
All kinds of fillers were used safely, for many years. Then along comes someone who cannot follow instructions and the result is world-wide panic.
; Afterall, there are people out there who still put 7mm Mausers in 7mm Mags - go figure.
|
CptCurl
|
| (.450 member) |
| 19/04/08 10:45 AM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Have any of you ever disassembled a jackhammer?
There is an air cylinder much like a steam engine cylinder, except that the "piston" is free. The "piston" is a slug of steel that fits neatly in the cylinder like a piston. But in this case the "piston" is the hammer. Its mass strikes against the bit each time the machine cycles, thus producing the hammer effect. I suspect that Wright's "secondary projectile" is the loose wad in this case, which acts just as the slug in a jackhammer. A tremendous pressure is created when the shock wave of the powder burn shoves the loose wad into the base of the stationery bullet.
Who knows?
I tend to agree with .400NitroExpress that there is no use for squib loads in a NE double rifle.
Curl
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 19/04/08 10:45 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Part of the trouble with fillers is that as a position sensitive, inert material inside the case, ammunition handling can cause shifting of the filler, comingling with powder, etc. This is probably no threat to a well-assembled load that is very carefully handled and fired on the range, but over time and general use may present problems for hunting ammunition.
The real question might be why use them in the first place? Skilled handloading precludes their need under almost, probably all, circumstances. Fillers are sometimes a crutch that further experimentation proves unnecessary. As for 5744 {and the similar 4759}, it serves in many cases to totally preclude the need for fillers.
| Rolland |
| (.333 member) |
| 19/04/08 03:53 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
"He pulled the trigger on the reduced load, the gun doubled with excessive recoil"
Is it possible that part of the problem is that the gun doubled, perhaps caused by the shooter causing the doubling ie; finger slipped off the front trigger or both fingers in the trigger guard.
the reason I ask is no one has addressed this or mentioned it. I just don't see how a single cartridge would do that damage to a rifle like that, They are pretty stout build guns. But then I don't use fillers in anything and have never loaded for a cartridge over 45-70 size.
Would be interested in hearing what anyone has to say.
|
CptCurl
|
| (.450 member) |
| 19/04/08 09:05 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Doubling won't wreck a double rifle.
Curl
| JabaliHunter |
| (.400 member) |
| 19/04/08 09:06 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Highly unlikely to be a fault with a Krieghoff. Most likely bad technique and finger position.
| new_guy |
| (Sponsor) |
| 19/04/08 10:38 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
The pressure from the first cartridge (that separated the case and the barrels) probably produced enough recoil that the rifle doubled on its own. Or scared the guy so bad that he slapped the rear trigger in his moment of surprise. Either way, Curl is right: doubling will not wreck your rifle.
The intention of the post was remind us all to be very careful when using a filler of any type, or a reduced load, or when reloading in general.
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 20/04/08 01:48 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
NewGuy - you are spot-on - directions are there to be followed. Failure to follow such can ruin your day or worse.
: Note that virtualy all the older writers now do not mention using fillers, or that they used them for decades without misshap. Throw in a bunch of non-thinkers into the crowd, and everyone must now say that rung barrels or other problems may result. These old timers continue to use fillers in their proper application and without mishap. It is those who second-guess, jump directions and 'know better' who have problems, then cry for salvation when it's too late.
: As I noted, people, to this day are still sticking 7mm Mausers into a 7mm Rem mag. The "light mag", "heavy mag" designations have started a whole new flurry of black faces.
: A guy picked up a dropped wildcat round at the range and since it chambered in his .30/06, he fired it. Lucky he was as the case was a full 1/8" shorter than the '06 case. just becasue it says '06 doesn't mean that's what it is, especially at a range where I shoot.
: What all this means is that people do stupid things. Supid is as stupid does.
| DUGABOY1 |
| (.400 member) |
| 28/04/08 01:36 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Quote:
Part of the trouble with fillers is that as a position sensitive, inert material inside the case, ammunition handling can cause shifting of the filler, comingling with powder, etc. This is probably no threat to a well-assembled load that is very carefully handled and fired on the range, but over time and general use may present problems for hunting ammunition.
The real question might be why use them in the first place? Skilled handloading precludes their need under almost, probably all, circumstances.
93X, If filler is properly used, no co-mingleing will occur, regardless of the type of filler used! The shifting of filler needs a place for the filler to shift to. A properly loaded NE round with filler, will not shift under any cercumstances.
The granulated fillers like shot buffers, are the worse offender to shifting, because the bullets are not seated down on top of the filler tight enough. No airspace is allowed in a case when any type of filler is used, this is why it is called "FILLER"! Once the charge is dumped into the case the filler has to be enough to fill the case enough so that when the bullet is seated, the filler is slightly compressed. Most of the ringed chambers are caused by useing filler like Creame of wheat, which should NEVER be used as filler. People got the ideaof useing C.O.W. from old books where it was used for fireforming wildcat cases. This was done without a bullet in the case. The case was loaded with a small amount of a fast burning powder, on the primer, then the case filled with C.O.W., no bullet, and with the rifle held barrel pointed at the sky, fired. This fireformed case very well, but would have been disasterous if a bullet had been seated as well. The other ringing is caused by idiots loading very light loads in a large case, and seating a wad down on top of the powder, then seating a bullet, leaving a large amount of airspace between the wad, and the bullet. When this is fired, with the wad seated that way, the wad becomes the projectile, and a short distance away the bullet becomes a secondary projectile, obstruction, much the same as another bullet in the barrels, ahead of the one being fired.
The two best fillers are the dacron fiber, and the foam plugs, but both are to be used to absolutely fill the space between the powder charge and the bullet, and be slightly compressed by the bullet being seated to the proper depth. "NO AIRSPACE"!!!!!!
There is no need for ultra light loads in any firearm. Light loads have destroyed far more firearms that over loads!
Handloading is a must with a double rifle for two reasons, #1 is because that is the only way you will get the best from your rifle, and sencondly, because of costs that most of us must take into consideration. When my life may be on the line, I trust my handloads far more that any factory worker, who may be coming off a week long drunk, when he loads my ammo.
| Ripp |
| (.577 member) |
| 28/04/08 07:52 AM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Quote:
Part of the trouble with fillers is that as a position sensitive, inert material inside the case, ammunition handling can cause shifting of the filler, comingling with powder, etc. This is probably no threat to a well-assembled load that is very carefully handled and fired on the range, but over time and general use may present problems for hunting ammunition.
The real question might be why use them in the first place? Skilled handloading precludes their need under almost, probably all, circumstances. Fillers are sometimes a crutch that further experimentation proves unnecessary. As for 5744 {and the similar 4759}, it serves in many cases to totally preclude the need for fillers.
93x57
With the airspace involved and using RL-15--which regulates very well in many doubles--it is needed to prevent possible handfires, etc. as the average joe does not have acess to the Federal .216 primer that Federal factory rounds carry..
My double gunsmith has used Dacron filler for several decades with no problems whatsoever..it is NOT a crutch for reloading and is needed when using the powder described above.. the dacron or foam wads from Kynoch will not comingle with the powder--been doing it quite a bit and acutally pulled one cartridge to see what if anything had happened as it had traveled to the range on several occassions and I purposely shoock it and beat on it..nothing negative..all was in place..
Ripp
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 28/04/08 08:30 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Ripp, as you and M<ac indicated proper loading with filles does absolutely no damage, and is actually necesary for safety and proepr burning in many loads.
; Many folks don't realize just what happens in most hangfires. It is a very dangerous situation as the bullet is usually pushed into the throat where it stops, then the powder goes off. Hangfires are about as bad as it gets, then sometimes causes pressure excursions and blown up rifles in worse case senarios. Any sort of hangfires are to be avoided at all costs.
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 28/04/08 11:12 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
I will concede that there may be circumstances where the use of fillers may be warranted. RIPP's big bore comes to mind though I have no experience with those so can't comment specifically. Hence my question about who else uses them above. Seems the big ones may not be conducive to properly regulating "non-fillered" loads with current powders?
However, fillers are very frequently an easy way to, seemingly, improve performance of rounds when a little more work in handloading would demonstrate that they are not needed. I used them for quite a few years before learning little by little that with proper loads they were not needed for my purposes {generally, reduced loads}, a finding that was asserted by many others who gave them up also. This not so much for the reason that they are "bad" but rather they are not needed. This is what I meant by a "crutch". Not a demeaning comment, but merely to address the fact that just because a practice renders improved performance sometimes it may not be the goto option most of the time, especially when there are lots of component company data options given these days. A crutch isn't needed to help me walk when I'm fit, but if I bust an ankle I don't want one crutch, I want two!
I really do not mean to be dogmatic on the issue. To each his own. If a fellow wants to use them, what can I do about? Maybe he needs to, maybe he doesn't. However, as far as recommending them on an open forum, I won't do it for a variety of reasons. I merely cannot recommend fillers because I have had so much success without them and have read of many others who do as well and while some of the hazards in their use are well-known, some, and more importantly, the remedies to them are less easily described. Kind of like greasing bullets that Hatcher describes as a practice that occured with initially great success in the '20's, that is, great success till trouble started cropping up with overpressure indications and some wrecked guns. Eventually the practice fell from favor as bullet design improved. Personally, I believe we have many powders now that reduce or eliminate the necessity for fillers in most cases as a general method for developing reduced loads.
Since there is little load data printed by the powder companies recommending the use of fillers, that means an open forum is where the info is, and I do not want to be involved in recommending something I may describe improperly or not quite adequately, that's all. Since there IS more and more reduced load data being produced by the component companies, that is the direction I personally prefer to direct folks inquiring of the subject.
Another note of a historical nature FWIW: various fillers and wads were used in British military production of "Short Range Practice" Marks II, III, IV .303 ammo as identified in Labbett and Mead ".303 INCH". And IIRC, US arsenals produced "guard cartridges" in various calibers in the early 1900's, some of which used cotton wool as a filler, tho I cannot remember the source for that offhand. I know some of the reasons they were discontinued, but cannot remember the "safety history" of their use or if safety considerations were part of the reasons for their discontinuance.
| Ripp |
| (.577 member) |
| 28/04/08 11:20 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
According to some info I have read, there are powders available for large doubles where a Filler is not needed..I believe 500 Nitro had eluded to those in previous posts-- the reason I have gone with RL-15 is two fold---one --the gunsmith I sent my double to (Ken Owen) for some work suggested it--and once he put together a load it shoots very, very well in my double..
Secondly, several articles I had read as well as visiting with others on this site stated they had good results as well...
Peronally, I think the issue of fillers has once again been blown way out of proportion because of the guy on AR using the wrong powder with his ...I am enjoying great results with mine and don't plan to change a thing...
Ripp
| 9.3x57 |
| (.450 member) |
| 28/04/08 11:47 PM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Interesting!
Here's one of the little buggers I shot with a cast bullet load yesterday afternoon with my 9.3x57 M146 Husqvarna, using 270 grain NEI bullet + a charge of 5744, no filler. Fun, fun, fun!!
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 29/04/08 01:30 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
My bro didn't enjoy shooting 122gr. of 2f with a 500gr. to 560gr. bullets in his 3-1/4" .45 cal. Sharps, so he developed a load of 95gr. 2F, with something like 8 to 10 .1" card wads to slightly compress the charge underneath the bullet. Accuracy was MOA and it didn't pound him quite as hard.
: There is a place for fillers, but they must be used correctly. Some fillers are not useable for some jobs, while others work for most jobs.
; Good poke, 9.3. I found a 275gr. cast bullet from my H&H would also kill a gopher - if you hit him right. Nice Columbia Ground Squirrel. About 1/2 size of a PD. Wish we had those, but alas, only Columbia's.
| Bill_Cooley |
| (.300 member) |
| 29/04/08 01:19 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
I posted this on Accuratereloading.com on the same post on using filler and blowing up his Krieghoff barrels. I don’t think he used enough filler to take up all the space and got the results G Wright talked about the base of the bullet acted like a secondary obstruction in the chamber/ barrel.
Hear is my other post.
I have read this thread and found it quite interesting. I read up on this phenomena back when I was starting to reload as I was using a filler over the powder in my old 45-70 trapdoor and was afraid of damaging it. Charlie Dell’s work was helpful in understanding the problem. A problem I didn’t know existed until a friend cautioned me about it.
I think the problem is caused by the pressure front caused by the rapidly expanding gasses of the burning powder. With a over powder wad this becomes a part of the pressure wave hitting the back of the seated bullet resulting in the barrel obstruction syndrome. This is why filling ALL THE SPACE is important. This retards the pressure wave enough that you don’t have a problem. Uniform ignition is just a happy by product of doing this.
“Federal factory 470 ammo sometimes has large variation in velocity due to the position of powder in the case when the trigger is pulled.”
I wonder what would happen if you pulled some of these and used a foam filler as Kynoch does and see if it helps.
Bill[
| Ripp |
| (.577 member) |
| 29/04/08 10:51 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Bill
its ironic that you mention the variation on Federal Factory ammo as I have chronographed it with the same results--sd is as much as 75 fps .... I have not experienced this with using filler on my reloads with RL-15...
Ripp
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 30/04/08 01:18 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
SFD's of 75fps doesn't sound like much (as a number), but that represents spreads of velocities up to the 200fps range, shot to shot. Of course, this is totally unaceptable.
: Ripp has a solution, but as all solutions, just be used correctly as he is doing.
: Old loading manuals and articles by 'gun writers' can be misleading to downright dangerous in not used EXACTLY as shown. A certain picture from a manual or article comes to mind of one such occurance, in that it shows a sectioned .45/70 case, with a very small charge of dfast burning powder in the bottom of the case, held there with a tiny tuft of dacron. It is a long way from the bullet. Now, such a light, small tuft of dacron will never ring the barrel, but if you double the amount of dacron, still a long way from the bullet, or change the material to a heavier density filler, and have it off the bullet's base, problems can become real.
| Bill_Cooley |
| (.300 member) |
| 30/04/08 12:47 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Daryl,
I was doing exactly what you described in your post “that it shows a sectioned .45/70 case, with a very small charge of fast burning powder in the bottom of the case, held there with a tiny tuft of Dacron.” The load I was using was about 10 gr of Unique with a ¼ sheet of single ply tissue holding the powder over the primer. I never had a problem but I was only using a 300 gr bullet. Where the problem of ringed chambers became most evident was with the long range shootsen shooters who seated the bullet into the rifling then loaded a charge of powder in the case. They often used a fast powder with a card wad to hold the powder in place. Charlie Dell did a bunch of experimenting to determine the cause of the chamber ringing. He found he could ring a chamber with out using a over powder wad.
I noticed you were using cardboard wads in your BP loads. Just be sure to add the weight of the wads to that of the bullet when deciding on what charge to use. You have it right in you MUST fill the case and compress the powder.
Bill
| Ripp |
| (.577 member) |
| 30/04/08 09:39 PM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Just an FYI---but the gentleman I got my info from that I am currently using and have for some time stated to use 5 to 6 grains of dacron --which is actually quite a bit and really does a pretty good job of filling in all the space in a .470 case.
Ripp
| 450_366 |
| (.400 member) |
| 30/04/08 10:21 PM |
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Hi!
Is the mentioned powder fast or slow? A reduced load with a slow powder could blowup when the pressure doesent build up. Thats what I have been told anyway. If so perhaps the wadding wouldnt make a differense.
| REN3 |
| (.224 member) |
| 01/05/08 12:17 AM |
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Look at Trail Boss powder from IMR. It is designed for low velocity heavy bullet loads for cowboy shooting. The powder has twice the bulk per ounce as other powders so you do not, and must not, use fillers. Great solution for practice loads. Bob.
| DarylS |
| (.700 member) |
| 01/05/08 03:06 AM |
|
|
|
Re: Foam Filler = Ruined barrels ?
|
Bill - with black powder loads, in order for the powder to burn correctly and give consistant results, the charge must alwasy be compressed. If not by the bullet, then by whatever wad you use. Soft wads cause spread standard deviations and are normally innacurate with BP.
: As noted in my post on the reduced charge in the BP case- my bro used 8 or 10 card wads of 1/10" thickness to 'compress' the powder charge.
: Yes - the weight of the cards adds to the weight of the other ejecta, which also includes roughly 57% of the powder charge's weight as solid waste. So- if you ware shooting 100gr. of black powder, with a 500gr. bullet, loaded with 30gr. of wads, you are actually shooting - 500gr. bullet + 57gr. solid powder waste + 30 gr. wads = 587gr. of ejecta.