Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***

Double Rifles, Single Shots & Combinations >> Double Rifles

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)
doubleriflejack
.333 member


Reged: 11/11/07
Posts: 352
Loc: Oregon, U.S.A.
RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment
      #97240 - 22/02/08 06:11 AM

In the first publication of this Australian book (second publiction is now available, and it may be considerably improved over the first publication--I HOPE SO---but don't know, as I haven't seen it), the "problems" related below were noticed with what was written. If you are involved with handloading for the British double rifles, I would like to bring your attention to these things, for they are terribly important, some of them from a safety standpoing. I would like to see what you experienced handloaders have to say about all this, especially you guys from Australia:

This book suggests use of IM 4895 powder for Nitro For Black loads. I found this to be quite satisfactory, and I have often used it. However, Ross Seyfried suggests use of IMR 4198, and I found that to be satisfactory too. And, the 4198 was pressure tested by Sherman Bell, with results published in Double Gun Journal, and with that information, one can be assured that 4198 provides accurate, safe, and an excellent powder for nitro for black.

More importantly, book suggests IMR 4831 powder for large cases, a true saftey concern, as Ross Seyfried, Champlin Firearms, double rifle builder Owen, and others, have said that several double rifles have been blown apart with such powder for handloads.

Finally, on page 71, for the .400 Purdey nitro for black load given, one will find that it is not a nitro for black load at all, but is a full nitro load, so never should that load be used in a black powder rifle.

Book mentions early day use of fillers such as plastic, cereal, etc. but doesn't specifically say that such fillers can be dangerous, as they do produce high pressurs, so today, such fillers are never used by those who know what they are doing, only kapok, as originally suggested by Elmer Keith, and later by Ross Seyfried are safe to use for fillers in handloads.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CptCurlAdministrator
.450 member


Reged: 01/05/04
Posts: 5319
Loc: Fincastle, Botetourt County, V...
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #97242 - 22/02/08 06:19 AM

doubleriflejack,

I strongly suggest you review the second edition of this fine work. Although I do not have the first edition and have not read it, I do have the second edition.

The second edition largely answers the questions you have posed. I think if you would read it, your concerns would be quelled.

Curl

--------------------
RoscoeStephenson.com

YOUR DOUBLE RIFLE IS YOUR BEST FRIEND.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
beleg2
.375 member


Reged: 15/08/07
Posts: 591
Loc: Bahía Blanca - Argentina
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment [Re: CptCurl]
      #97243 - 22/02/08 06:38 AM

How compares second to fist edition?
I have 1ª.
Thanks
Martin


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: beleg2]
      #97245 - 22/02/08 07:36 AM


doubleriflejack

Rememeber, when that book came out, it was the only reference
to DR's or for DR Shooters and had a lot to do with the resurgence of interest.

If you knew some of the stories and what some people did to get DR's shooting in Australia before ANY ammo was available, you'd have a heart attack.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CHAPUISARMES
.416 member


Reged: 16/01/08
Posts: 2908
Loc: DUBBO, NSW, AUSTRALIA
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97249 - 22/02/08 08:09 AM

Hi Doubleriflejack,

I just bought the second edition (late 2007) more as a reference book but it was very hard to obtain and had sold out at the time in Australia and had to get one from H&H in England but it was very expensive via tem as you can guess. I think it is a great book but I sent an Email to Graeme Wright who said that with a bit of luck, Edition 3 will be out later in 2008.!! If you wan't to check when, Email him on: thepilotgw@hotmail.com

As I use it stricky as a reference book and can not comment on Vs 1 versus Vs2, sorry.

--------------------


"Travel Light, Travel Fast and carry a Big Bore"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul
.400 member


Reged: 28/08/07
Posts: 1031
Loc: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: CHAPUISARMES]
      #97273 - 22/02/08 05:10 PM

I'm still dark on GW because he dumped on my invention of regulation with a separate sight leaf for each barrel, switched by recoil inertia. Possibly he was referring to the Kodiak separate sights, which were changed manually, but I had sold a DB Winchester rifle to a well-known gun writer who made reference to my sight in an article.

OK, as a primary sight on a DG rifle, my sight added complexity and could be seen as an improvement to button-up boots. But I still think the last version, which looks just like extra leaves down the rib, has merit for long shots, sub-loads or non-regulated bullet weights.

Not the done thing, old chap? True, but we do put scopes on doubles and Robin Hood didn't use a compound bow.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mickey
.416 member


Reged: 05/01/03
Posts: 4647
Loc: Pend Oreille Valley, Idaho
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Paul]
      #97275 - 22/02/08 06:07 PM

Quote:

I'm still dark on GW because he dumped on my invention of regulation with a separate sight leaf for each barrel, switched by recoil inertia. Possibly he was referring to the Kodiak separate sights, which were changed manually, but I had sold a DB Winchester rifle to a well-known gun writer who made reference to my sight in an article.

OK, as a primary sight on a DG rifle, my sight added complexity and could be seen as an improvement to button-up boots. But I still think the last version, which looks just like extra leaves down the rib, has merit for long shots, sub-loads or non-regulated bullet weights.

Not the done thing, old chap? True, but we do put scopes on doubles and Robin Hood didn't use a compound bow.





What?????

--------------------
Lovu Zdar
Mick

A Man of Pleasure, Enterprise, Wit and Spirit Rare Books, Big Game Hunting, English Rifles, Fishing, Explosives, Chauvinism, Insensitivity, Public Drunkenness and Sloth, Champion of Lost and Unpopular Causes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Marrakai
.416 member


Reged: 09/01/03
Posts: 3729
Loc: Darwin, Top End of Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Paul]
      #97276 - 22/02/08 06:13 PM

DRJack:
As the guys say, the second edition is a major expansion on the first, but it does not retract or correct any of those earlier loads. All loads recommended by Wrightie are pressure-tested, which was not the case for all loads recommended by Seyfried, Champlins, Owen etc at that time.

No-one, to my knowledge, has ruined a gun in Australia following any of Graeme's published loads. That some DRs have been ruined in the US is a separate issue, and I won't go into the probable reasons here.

Medium-burning powders are the obvious candidates for N-for-B loads, with fillers such as felt or polyurathane-foam wads, shotshell buffer, or dacron/kapok, to take up the air-space. Slow-burners such as the 4831 family are perfect for the big NE cases, usually without the need for filler. Many, many thousands of handloads following these principles have been safely fired without incident, both in Australia and the US (and elsewhere) since the first edition of Graeme's book.

Sure, a few US self-appointed experts (notably Seyfried) may have their nose out of joint at being out-published by an Aussie, but that's just too bloody bad. They should learn to appreciate good info despite the fact that it came from a competitor's pen.

To answer your queries specifically:
Quote:

This book suggests use of IM 4895 powder for Nitro For Black loads



Graeme's recommendations for the N-for-B loads are on page 71, as you have noted. No-where on that page does he recommend IMR 4895. In fact, he favoured H4350, with some loads recommending AR2208, IMR 4759, and a H4831 option for the .450.



Quote:

book suggests IMR 4831 powder for large cases, a true saftey concern



This is not a safety concern, as stated many thousands of full-nitro rounds so-loaded have been safely fired. I should add that I would personally recommend Hodgdon's H4831, an 'Extreme' powder which does not increase pressure with ambient temperature like the IMR powders (and also happens to be made in Australia).



Quote:

for the .400 Purdey nitro for black load given, one will find that it is not a nitro for black load at all, but is a full nitro load



There was no "full nitro" load for the .400 Purdey, to my knowledge. The smokeless load was 47gr cordite, a 'light cordite' load, equivalent to what would have been an N-for-B load, had they called it that, with less than 10 tons pressure.



Quote:

only kapok, as originally suggested by Elmer Keith, and later by Ross Seyfried are safe to use for fillers in handloads.



Now come on, mate, even you know that is just BS.
Here's the deal: Pull a thousand original Eley or Kynoch Light Cordite cartridges, and I'll send you ten bucks for every one containing kapok, if you send me ten bucks for every one containing a jute or compressed felt wad.
I'll PM you my EFT details.


I should add that a number of loads using Reloader powders are included in the 2nd edition, in deference to the US market and the work done by Seyfried, Bell and others (which Graeme graciously acknowledges, by the way), so if you have a burning desire for half-empty cases of RE topped up with huge balls of kapok or dacron, you are catered for. Good luck!

--------------------
Marrakai
When the bull drops, the bullshit stops!
--------------------------------
www.marrakai-adventure.com.au


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Marrakai]
      #97278 - 22/02/08 06:25 PM


DRjack

Don't believe everything you ead in the US Publications
or forums.

As Marrakai said, I think a hell of a lot more DR's
have been blown up stateside than in Australia.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
beleg2
.375 member


Reged: 15/08/07
Posts: 591
Loc: Bahía Blanca - Argentina
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97287 - 22/02/08 09:17 PM

Hi,
Very good thread.
Is there any copy still avaiable? I have 1º edition and would like to have a copy of the 2º.
If I underestad correctly, there will be a 3º edition?
Thanks
Martin


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JabaliHunter
.400 member


Reged: 16/05/07
Posts: 1958
Loc: England
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: beleg2]
      #97291 - 22/02/08 09:38 PM

I have the 1st, but would like to get the 3rd also. Any more details of publisher and availability so I can put my name down?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
doubleriflejack
.333 member


Reged: 11/11/07
Posts: 352
Loc: Oregon, U.S.A.
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Marrakai]
      #97321 - 23/02/08 06:23 AM

Seems, we have a difference of opinion, and I won't argue with someone who thinks he knows it all. IMR 4832 has resulted in blown rifles in this country enough times that some of us know enough not to use it. Of course, no cordite loads have any kapok, but cordite is not modern smokeless powder either, as it is string-like, as you know, and cordite behaves differently than our modern smokeless, so case is not filled with smokeless the way it is filled by cordite. Wads work fine, especially if using automotive cork ones that break up easily, but kopok works even better, without worry of cork wads moving with recoil. In my books, after 40 to 50 years of shooting and hunting in Montana and Oregon, using doubles with handloads, kapok is the best, and Ross Seyfried knows what he is talking about, while numerous others still have to learn the hard way. Have a nice day, mate. Sullivan

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
peter
removed


Reged: 11/04/07
Posts: 1493
Loc: denmark
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #97328 - 23/02/08 07:37 AM

Quote:

Book mentions early day use of fillers such as plastic, cereal, etc. but doesn't specifically say that such fillers can be dangerous, as they do produce high pressurs, so today, such fillers are never used by those who know what they are doing, only kapok, as originally suggested by Elmer Keith, and later by Ross Seyfried are safe to use for fillers in handloads.




hi jack

but i would take kynoch's expirence over a few american gunwriters anyday, kynoch uses and sells foam plugs in a lot of there loads. i love elmer keiths writings but he is from another time where seyfried is a fun read but he is also a gunwriter whore right up there with the best of them.

david little from kynoch finds the book a very good and precise read, and reccomend it a lot, at least that is what he told me.

regarding marrakai being a know it all, i for one have recived very good help from him on more than a few occations, and actually consider him one of the most down to earth people on this forum.

why are you lashing out, this is not AR where differences promotes pissing contest for fun.
we try to do it in a civiliced manner here.

best regards

peter


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: peter]
      #97329 - 23/02/08 08:14 AM


What I can't understand is why everyone Hero worships Ross Seyfried who came on the scene so much later than others
yet is looked at as the guru of everything.

I agree Elmer Keith was in a different era so leave his writings in the era there were written - and thye were damn good.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Nakihunter
.375 member


Reged: 13/10/07
Posts: 588
Loc: New Zealand
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97333 - 23/02/08 10:08 AM

Quote:


What I can't understand is why everyone Hero worships Ross Seyfried who came on the scene so much later than others yet is looked at as the guru of everything.




I love analysing personalities.....though I have not met Seyfried or Wright.

Wright is a former Airline pilot - the skills required are unique in terms of handling pressure, responsibility, precision, keep your cool, know all the facts etc.

Seyfried has been a lot of things including a pistol champion, PH & a machinist. He had to face pressure, take responsibility, keep his cool & know his facts - but in a totally different way. He also seems very well heeled & ownes the big Elk Song ranch & several valuable guns of a wide variety.

I think Seyfied would have greater experience with pistol & bolt rifle reloading as well as shotgun reloading. On DRs I would rate Wright's experience as there was no such publication before his. More DRs were USED in Australia in the 1970's & 80's than anywhere else. Ross did a lot of his DR & DG rifle shooting / experimenting in Australia. I wouldn't be surprised if the two men have met & even interacted on DR subjects.

The big difference seems to be in personalities - Ross is such a "in-your face" writer with strong opinions & "superlative" conclusions. Wright on the other hand seems to be so scholarly, technical, moderate & almost tedious in his style. Both are very good reading. One is a show champion & the other is a back room researcher.

I hope that answers 500Nitro's question.

--------------------
Always shoot through the target & not just at it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mickey
.416 member


Reged: 05/01/03
Posts: 4647
Loc: Pend Oreille Valley, Idaho
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97335 - 23/02/08 10:15 AM

DRJ

You say:

Quote:

More importantly, book suggests IMR 4831 powder for large cases, a true saftey concern, as Ross Seyfried, Champlin Firearms, double rifle builder Owen, and others, have said that several double rifles have been blown apart with such powder for handloads.




Do you have any specific examples of that? I know that 3031 is dangerous, even though it was recommended by Jim Bell back in the day. I know that R-15 with a wad is dangerous for ringing, even though many here and elsewhere swear by it for reduced recoil.

I have never, in close to 30 years of reloading and shooting Double rifles, mostly British, ever heard that 4831 was dangerous. In fact, if my memory serves Ross told me last spring that he likes it for the full case it gives without need for a wad. I have shot thousands of rounds in 30 or so different English rifles using 4831 and have never seen any type of problem. You have raised my curiosity and I now need to call Ross and Ken and ask them why they believe this.

A good topic for open minded discussion. Graham is known to many here as he is one of the original workers and writers in getting Double rifles back up and running, before the bandwagon Double rifle experts even knew such a thing existed. Ross has learned from his experience and I know has come to some different conclusions than Graham has. I do know he doesn't care for any man made plastic type fillers. Surprises me he likes kapok at all.

A shame that they both don't post here. It would make for an interesting discussion.

--------------------
Lovu Zdar
Mick

A Man of Pleasure, Enterprise, Wit and Spirit Rare Books, Big Game Hunting, English Rifles, Fishing, Explosives, Chauvinism, Insensitivity, Public Drunkenness and Sloth, Champion of Lost and Unpopular Causes.

Edited by mickey (23/02/08 12:56 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Marrakai
.416 member


Reged: 09/01/03
Posts: 3729
Loc: Darwin, Top End of Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: mickey]
      #97341 - 23/02/08 11:39 AM

Mickey:
Your post has brought me to the realisation that I was probably unduly harsh on Ross seyfried's writings, at DRJack's say-so. Thanks for pointing that out.

Seyfried has a writing style that is sometimes difficult to swallow: in particular, the old "At long last I alone have discovered the secrets of shooting BP Express rifles/Paradoxes/DRs, and will now share this with the world!!" chestnut. Meanwhile, most of us here have been quietly going about the business of successfully shooting our BP Express rifles/Paradoxes/DRs happpily for decades without fuss, and the Brits were doing it matter-of-fact for decades before that.

Having said that though, he writes with a greater empathy for vintage British firearms, and the social environment in which they developed, than any other US writer, most of whom just 'don't get it'. Even though I may occasionally wince at his grandiose statements, I would rather read his works than those of most other US writers (at the very least, because of the marvellous subject material and photos!).

Now, to fillers:
Seyfried doesn't like foam fillers, and has published this fact citing two blown guns using foam fillers (can't remember the reference, sorry, but fairly recent). Personally I don't like foam either, but Kynamco use them, and the lads in Melbourne have had great success with them for over a decade now.

IMHO there are two probable reasons why foam could be bad.
1. There are many different types of 'foam'. Wright says the correct type is polyurathane foam, but I have heard reference to speaker foam (which may or may not be polyurathane), foam ear-plugs, florist's foam, egg-crate foam, etc, etc. Some of these sources of foam may be foam rubber, or other compounds which could be unsuitable. I've even seen reference to polystyrene in print! Perhaps an incorrect foam wad could blow a DR? If in doubt, buy Kynamco foam wads.
2. Polyurathane foam is 'grippy' and if slightly oversize for the case, could be compressed onto the powder during reloading, and remain there due to friction against the inside case-wall. This would create air-space under the bullet, which could ring a chamber (or possibly blow a DR?). The same can happen if the loaded cartridges are transported base-upward: the weight of the powder could compress the foam wad up against the base of the projectile, where it might 'stick' when the round is reversed and then chambered: another airspace, this time between the foam wad and the powder.

This latter reason is why I personally don't like foam: I had this happen to a batch of .500/.450 Express cartridges, and could hear the powder rattling inside the case in the field, despite 2 half-inch polyurathane foam wads which took up all the air-space at the time of loading. I also don't trust the longevity of polyurathane foam, as it can become a crumbly, gooey mess after a few years in the tropics where I live.

DRJack: You are quite right in that fillers and wads can be dangerous, but enough has been written these days to ensure that the potentially unsafe practices are well documented and fairly well understood, at least to the point where most of us here happily use wads or dacron filler on a daily basis without fear of blowing-up our precious DRs. Perhaps you missed it, but Wright's warnings about fillers and wads are on pages 65 to 68 of the 1st Edition, a fairly comprehensive treatment.
It pays to be vigilant, for sure, and a reminder every now and then is certainly no bad thing.

As far as being 'know-it-all', I'm simply here to learn like most other members of this forum, but part of that process is clarifying the corporate knowledge when someone appears to be deliberately 'muddying the water'.

...and Mickey, we have to get back to Paul's intrigueing post at some stage...!!!!

--------------------
Marrakai
When the bull drops, the bullshit stops!
--------------------------------
www.marrakai-adventure.com.au


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Marrakai]
      #97342 - 23/02/08 11:54 AM


Here's something to ponder.

It was in AUSTRALIA that Holland & Holland found people
loading and shooting Double Rifles, but more importantly
BLACK POWDER Double Rifles, Bore Guns and Paradoxes

AND

Shoting them damn accurately.

So much so that I would guess that H&H used the interest here to rekindle manuafcture and development of DR's etc.

All credit to the old school in Australia who did this.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CptCurlAdministrator
.450 member


Reged: 01/05/04
Posts: 5319
Loc: Fincastle, Botetourt County, V...
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97353 - 23/02/08 01:24 PM

In my opinion we all owe a debt of gratitude to the Aussies for their interest in DR's. You kept the candle lit while it was flickering out in other parts of the world.

Curl

--------------------
RoscoeStephenson.com

YOUR DOUBLE RIFLE IS YOUR BEST FRIEND.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: CptCurl]
      #97355 - 23/02/08 01:43 PM



You (as in the US) had the odd person who kept the light going
- Elmer Keith for one.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mickey
.416 member


Reged: 05/01/03
Posts: 4647
Loc: Pend Oreille Valley, Idaho
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: 500Nitro]
      #97358 - 23/02/08 02:36 PM

Marakai

Quote:

...and Mickey, we have to get back to Paul's intrigueing post at some stage...!!!!




Yes, most definitely. I think it may deserve a thread of it's own though. I hope Paul posts some more information.

--------------------
Lovu Zdar
Mick

A Man of Pleasure, Enterprise, Wit and Spirit Rare Books, Big Game Hunting, English Rifles, Fishing, Explosives, Chauvinism, Insensitivity, Public Drunkenness and Sloth, Champion of Lost and Unpopular Causes.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
doubleriflejack
.333 member


Reged: 11/11/07
Posts: 352
Loc: Oregon, U.S.A.
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: Marrakai]
      #97413 - 24/02/08 05:59 AM

Seems I opened a can of worms, without intending to do so! Seems, if I am understanding all the responses correctly, that the double rifle Austrailian guys seem to be a bit "put off" by U.S. double rifle writers, or some such thing, and I had no idea that was the case, nor do I really care about things like that. When I first bought that book by Wright, soon after that first edition came out, after reading it, I was quite surprised and disappointed in a few things I read in it, especially those items I menstioned in my original post here, regarding what was in the book. I too have, in the past, received very good positive responses from Marrakai regarding double rifle issues, so I too had a good impression of him, UNTIL I read his rather heated comments about what I had written about the Wright writings, and he, clearly lashed out at some things I had to say, and did it in a way that is uncalled for, and no, Marrakai, I wasn't ever trying to be "muddying the water," as you put it. No, Marrakai, I did not overlook what Wright wrote on pg 65-68, but thought that he, Wright, could have been a bit more specific in what you call a warning on those pages. I took what he wrote to be such that many guys, inexperienced, might not take what he wrote as a warning, exactly! I, and many others in this country, were handloading and shooting double rifles way before Wright wrote his book, and when the book came out, I thought that one explanation for the "misinformation" as I saw it, in the book, was due to fact that the Australians were way behind the Americans in shooting doubles. Elmer Keith I knew, and he gave me a lot of my early information on handloading for doubles. Yes, he was from a different era, but the doubles we shoot and handload for today, are the same ones, and handloads needed, from that era---some things don't change much. No, I don't know Seyfried, and I certainly don't worship him or anyone else, but I do know what he has written, especially regarding double rifles and handloading for sames, and, in my view, you are right Mickey, when you say he "knows his facts." My view is that we would all be well advised to listen and follow what he has to say. What he has to say is exactly what I have found to be true as it relates to double rifles and handloading for same. Yes, 4831 has blown several fine doubles, and I think I know why, after reading some rather interesting tests done with it some time back, but I don't want to go into all the details about that. Contact Champlin firearms, for they, for years, quit using that powder because they had found it to be unsafe, and were warning others to not use it, and they have about as much experience as anyone with double rifles, believe me. In double gun Journal, Owen, the excellent and rare Tennessee double rifle builder (highest quality doubles, that is), wrote one article warning against using 4831, and I was delighted to see it, for others have repeatedly been writing about using it, and I know that it works a lot of the time, or seems to work), but AT TIMES will indeed blow rifles. Too bad that some people can only learn by trial and error on their own!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JabaliHunter
.400 member


Reged: 16/05/07
Posts: 1958
Loc: England
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #97421 - 24/02/08 06:56 AM

Quote:

Yes, 4831 has blown several fine doubles, and I think I know why, after reading some rather interesting tests done with it some time back, but I don't want to go into all the details about that.



Wish you would!

You can blow up a rifle with any kind of powder. If I remember correctly, all the loads in Wright's books were tested and proved safe in his or friend's rifles that he shot. Quite frankly, I found it refreshing to read a book by someone who has been there, done that, and was doing it long before me, without having the F*****g "do not use this load because I only got it off quickload and don't want you to sue me" message every other sentence, as you find in virtually all US articles.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DUGABOY1
.400 member


Reged: 02/02/03
Posts: 1340
Loc: TEXAS USA
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please comment [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #97427 - 24/02/08 07:35 AM



I only have the first edition of Graeme's book, so cannot comment on his later writings! Like most folks here over 50 yrs old, I have been playing with double rifles, and hand loading for them since I bought my first in 1958, but have had an interest in them since the age of six yrs, when I saw my first one! I am 71 yrs old so that was a long time ago!

Like most from that era, I've made some mistakes, that didn't turn out well, but have never ringed a chamber, or burst a barrel on a rifle of any kind. Back in the fifties, there were very few who understood how regulation works, and some real off-the-wall statements were, and to some extent, are still are being made, and not only in gun rags, by self appointed double rifle experts! This phenomenon is not, nor was it, unique to writers, or hand-loaders in the USA. In the first place Ross Seyfried is not an American, and though I loved old Elmer, he was not overly flush with knowledge on double rifles himself, though he, and Ruark were responsible for a continued interest in them by Americans, and others. Bell did a big favor to those of us who had fine old double rifles for which components were no longer available, but he didn’t know everything either. Still with the proliferation of double rifles, from the India market, in OZ, and to some extent in the USA as well, caused a great deal of experimentation. That experimentation, benefited us all, and let others make the bad mistakes, and tell us why they happened, so we didn’t do them as well. Graeme is one of those people, IMO! I’ve never been partial to Ross’s writings, though I don’t agree with his take on H-4831 in double rifles, or some others take on fillers, they all have something to offer. It is up to the reader to separate the wheat, from the chaff!

To make a point, there is one post on this thread, the shows a total lack of understanding of the concept of double rifles, and the regulation of them, though well written, and seemingly informative, to a less than knowledgeable reader. This is not uncommon, even among some very well respected gunsmiths, custom gun makers, and gun writers alike. There are amateurs right here on this web-site, and on AR, as well as others, who know more about the workings of double rifles, than 90 % of the gun writers and custom gun makers everywhere. One such myth, fostered by gun writers, and others, is that because the barrels are physically converging, that all double rifles are designed to cross fire at a given range! This is caused, partly, by the language used by British double rifle makers, in their literature. The statement that a rife is regulated to 100 Mtrs, or 50 Mtrs , is not a clear statement. Many take this to mean the shots cross at that range, with is absolutely not the case. This is in reference to where the standing sight is cut for point blank zero, in the center of a composite group of both barrels at that range, nothing more. People read this statement to mean the barrels are regulated at that range, but in fact are regulated so the barrels shoot side by side, at any range. Gun writers make the same mistake, and further the misconception, among readers, and so-called gunsmiths alike! Is it any wonder people new to double rifle make this mistake?

I, for one, think the Graeme book is a jewel, and though not complete by any stretch of the imagination, it is a far better reference over what ever is second. His second edition is no longer available in the USA. I’m looking forward to a second printing of N0 2, and the availability of N03.
This web site, and AR as well, offer a lot of REAL information, not available anyplace else in the world today! People like Marrakai, 400Nitro Express, Cptcurl, and others here, and also on AR are well informed, and are willing to share their knowledge with those of us who are woefully lacking in some of the history, and finer points of the different makes, especially the Britt rifles! No single person in the world could write a book that covers it all, but between the folks on these two websites, anything can be found, simply by asking questions!

………………………………Good Show, Mates!

--------------------
..........Mac >>>===(x)===>
DUGABOY1, and MacD37 founding member of DRSS www.doublerifleshooterssociety.com
"If I die today, I have had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rigbymauser
.400 member


Reged: 15/05/05
Posts: 2028
Loc: Denmark
Re: RE: Book, Shooting the British Double Rifle, please com [Re: JabaliHunter]
      #97428 - 24/02/08 07:36 AM

I am still a novice regarding reloading for doublerifles...and my upcomming 10 bore will be no exception either. I have been reloading for all kinds of lever/bolt/singleshot rifles and revolvers...but as in all new fields, a good investigation on theories and practical knowledges is allways adviseable.
I have Graems book and find it very informative. There are allways something new one can learn..
yes..I have too read Ross Seyfried advice the IMR 3031 for equally grain for grain substitute for cordite in an old G&A artical. It did work in his articals..apparently...who can blame him??.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)



Extra information
1 registered and 377 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  CptCurl 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 19768

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved