Cartridge brass as powder measures

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

AZ-Robert

45 Cal.
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
941
Reaction score
0
Don't have a pistol stand, don't have a flask with measured spout, so I had to improvise while on the range today. Putting the revolver down, measuring the powder, picking the revolver up and pouring powder into the chamber, etc, was not going to work. So, I picked up six 9mm cases and used them... filled all six with powder, picked up the revolver and dumped powder into each chamber, set the wads, etc.

Turns out a 9mm Luger casing is 15 grains. A .40 S&W is about 22 grains. Anybody else measured up any other calibers?
 
Dixie's catalog has a list in the back of the powder capacity of many cartridge cases form the humble .22 on up! :thumbsup:
 
interesting. a 38 S&W case (the short one , not the special) holds the same 15 grains as your 9mm

I've been using it with my LePage
 
Jeez, a cut off 270 case holds 60 gr, too. You suppose they're related? :grin:
 
A very good system for going to the range for a days shooting.

A word of WARNING though: Make sure you use BRASS casses. We had a customer one time using this same system, and he kept his made-up charges in a western cartridge belt. When he went to recharge his revolver he got to about the 5th hole and the whole thing flashed. When I examined his rig I discovered he was using cut down 7.62x39 russian casses for his charge tubes. These are not brass but steel and they built up a static charge from being in the belt. When he went to charge the cylinder the steel case jumped spark to the cylinder and ignited the charges.
Shoot Safely :winking:

Toomuch
...........
Shoot Flint
 
Rebel said:
I thought it had already been proved that a static electricity spark couldn't ignite black powder?

I don't know where you heard this, but this one for certain did.

Toomuch
..........
Shoot Flint
 
There are many posts about this but perhaps this one will do for starters:
STATIC ELECTRICITY

What they have found is the carbon in the powder conducts the static electricity so that it travels along the outer surface layer of powder without generating any heat. Without heat, the powder does not ignite.

When the guy used a steel cartridge case, I suppose there is a chanch that he could have bumped it hard enough against the cylinder to shear off a sliver of steel.
A hot sliver of metal could easily ignite the powder. Just ask one of these Flintlock guys. :)

zonie :)
 
Static could have caused it IF there was some fine powder dust floating near the static discharge. The dust in the air is what usually causes the explosions at the factory.
 
Zonie said:
There are many posts about this but perhaps this one will do for starters:
STATIC ELECTRICITY

What they have found is the carbon in the powder conducts the static electricity so that it travels along the outer surface layer of powder without generating any heat. Without heat, the powder does not ignite.

When the guy used a steel cartridge case, I suppose there is a chance that he could have bumped it hard enough against the cylinder to shear off a sliver of steel.
A hot sliver of metal could easily ignite the powder. Just ask one of these Flintlock guys. :)

Yep, that's the real story. It's not static electricity that is to blame. It is a sliver of molten metal that does it. Brass is preferred over steel around powder because it is soft enough that it doesn't get hot when sliced off by encountering a harder material.

Regarding the static charge bit, what often gets overlooked in these discussions is that brass, being mostly copper, is a pretty good conducter. And, more importantly, it is very good at producing static electricity and was for that reason used in many of the early electrical experiments -- the early Van de Graff generator, for example, used brass balls as contacts.

Steel, on the other hand, is in the neutral position of the Triboelectric Series -- right between wood and cotton. It actually produces less static electricity than brass when in contact with leather.

Check it out:[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triboelectricity[/url]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There could ,of course, have been some other explanation that escaped us. We did not have perfect lab conditions to check it out when the incident occured.
One note I did see when I qued your link was, just two post prior to the Stumpkiller post the link came in on, was the post of MusketMan refering to the safety precautions of Goex to protect against static. Could it be they know something, or are they just paranoid.

Toomuch
.........
Shoot Flint
 
LeatherMoose said:
Jeez, a cut off 270 case holds 60 gr, too. You suppose they're related? :grin:

Interesting point. A 280 Rem. case will do the very same thing. :blah: Do you suppose it's a conspiracy? :rotf: :rotf:

Toomuch
..........
Shoot Flint
 
The Dixie Gun Works book says 70grs. guess it depends on where ya' cut it. Any of the '06 based ctgs. should throw the same amount. :hmm:
 
I think the .280 case has a longer base to shoulder length so you can't chamber one in yore .270. It oughta hold more. :hmm: I been usin' CCI' Aluminum Blazer cases, because you can't reload 'em any way. :winking:
 
I prefer brass cases also cause it's easyer to solder a little handle made of copper wire to better hold the case while measuring . plus you can put a little lanyard or leather thong to attach it to your gear .
 
my first powder measure was a 45 acp brass case with a coat hanger loop handle. Made another at the same time that i filed off a little bit of the case so it held about 10% less. Probably got the idea from the back of the Dixie catalog, but don't remember for sure. Used the larger one for powder & the smaller for cornmeal, to load a Ruger Old Army.The Old Army was my first black powder weapon, bought in Germany at Weisbaden R&G Club a while back... for about $100..

rayb
every day a holiday, every meal a feast, payday coming up soon
 
Back
Top