We need a rule

Dave Coots

Dave Coots

64 Chevy 409 10.42 129
After reading about Tink's accidentand the resulting cry for another rule in the name of saftey, and also the idea about making a rule for superfeet, i think we need a rule about the loads we use in our guns. Now, just to clairify things, Dennis is a friend of mine, i feel bad he was injured, and i hope he comes out ok with this. Also i don't like seeing the benches tore up anymore that anyone else.

With that said i think we need a rule concerning the loads we put into our 6PPC rifles. A well respected shooter (thank you) told me that the max load for our guns ia about 3100 FPS with a 68 Gr bullet. This is obtained with 27Gr of N133 powder and creates 48-50 psi. I think the two orginazations need to pass a rule making this the max load for competition, just for saftey's sake. Also, just in case an action does explode, for saftey's sake, i believe every range should have 1 inch Ar500 plate between every bench to protect the shooters on either side of the explosion.

Just my thoughts, for saftey.

Dave
 
Dave

The maximum safe pressure is based on the case strength. At least in the case of our bolt actions. If the case fails, then the firearm can fail as well. Shooting loads at 52000 C.U.P. using Remington brass is no safer than running pressures of 65000 C.U.P. in a case capable of handling that pressure. Lapua brass handles the pressures that are run in the 6 PPC as well as Remington brass handles book loads. Also I would like to note that pressures around 49000 PSI are considerably lower than industry standards for several high performance cartridges such as the 460 S&W, which uses brass that is inferior to Lapua. Therefore it can be concluded that 3100 fps is not truley the maximum load for the PPC. These PPC pressures have been proven safe by millions of rounds fired. There is already one rule in place amoung BR shooters concerning pressure. That rule is case life. If the primers are loosened from excessive pressure, the load is too hot, and not backing it down isn't smart. Also I would be surprised to see any piece of metal from an exploding action go through any more than 1/8" plate. Not meaning to be controversial, just stating the facts.

Michael
 
Last edited:
Dave Coots said:
I think the two orginazations need to pass a rule making this the max load for competition, just for saftey's sake. Also, just in case an action does explode, for saftey's sake, i believe every range should have 1 inch Ar500 plate between every bench to protect the shooters on either side of the explosion.Dave
Click to expand...

Dave, I didn't see a smiley face after your post but I assume you are kidding.:rolleyes:

If you are serious you will have a chance in November to make a good start toward that goal of protecting everyone from everything.:cool:

Ray:)
 
Cheechako said:
Dave, I didn't see a smiley face after your post but I assume you are kidding.:rolleyes:

If you are serious you will have a chance in November to make a good start toward that goal of protecting everyone from everything.:cool:

Ray:)
Click to expand...

Thank you Ray, for the voice of reason.................Don
 
Dave

How about making us older shooters wear Depends Diapers so that when I have four shots in a .050 group, and see the fifth shot go in, (or out, for that matter), and I cr-p in my pants, I won't stink up the firing line.:D........jackie
 
Last edited:
Jackie's suggestion seams reasonable to me.

(I am older than Jackie)
 
It always concerns me that safety proposals only consider other competitors. We have officials & onlookers to consider as well.

Under the circumstances, I suggest that competitors be accommodate in individual bunkers similar to those used at powder manufacturing sites comnnected to the behind the line by a system of trenches with 90 degree angles to preclude shrapnel from leaving the firing point other than upward. Firing point covers should be of that containment matting used by demolition firms.

As far as jackie's suggestion is concerned, I'm reminded of the guy noticed in a shower room somewhere with a cork up his fundament. When asked about it he explained that he'd found an old lamp & rubbed it, releasing a genie who offered to grant him one wish, to which he replied, "No s***?"
 
New Rules Now. ORG

I just want to add that its about da n time we get a seatbelt rule! Shooters have been falling off the bench for years and nothing has been about it. A lot of shooters are getting older, add that with the extra recoil of a 30 BR. Well you get the picture.I call for action now, if not for us for the children.;)
 
This is going to get interesting! :D

Dan Batko


"Where are we going, and why am I in this basket?"
 
Well

The actions we have and the brass we use are up to the task. However, we are pushing the envelope pretty hard. I believe Jackie once referred to his load as "small nuclear" or some such. We get a lot of velocity per grain of powder. Pressures are indeed high.
At the very least, I think the brass bullet knock out rods should be banned....2 accidents are enough, not to mention the unreported incidents that caused no bodily harm.
It seems like a no brainer to remove that rod, but it also seems like a no brainer to shoot on your own target...................
BA
 
Last edited:
pistol shooters use brass rods all the time and i have never heard of a similar incident with them..

here is the difference...the rod is always longer than the bbl...allows you to tap out a stuck(as in primer only load) bullet out of the bbl. longer than the bbl...way too easy to see.

so i would not ban rods, i would ban rods shorter than the bbl........

mike in co
 
similar accidents have happened with cleaning rods should they be banned?
 
Ray

;)
FBecigneul said:
The calendar approaches September 1, not April 1
But I also know what prompted Dave's post.
Click to expand...

Ray;);)
Yes, I was kidding about the load deal, but not kidding about making a new rule every time some saftey issue pops up. We are going to rule ourselves out of existence trying to fix every event.

Francis-you may be reading my mind-what there is of it.

Dick

I think if the orginazations are going to make knee jerk saftey rules for everything that comes up in the name of saftey, we are all in trouble. Will it come to the point where the powers that be(IBS &NBRSA) sell you a complete approved gun, powder measure set at 27 gr, aproved N133 powder, special approved bullets(one choice), and a tuner so the gun can be in tune at the 27gr loads?

Just like the restrictor plates in Nascar.

Dave-seat belts-ya thats the ticket.

I guess i was born a hundred years too late-i'll taker care of myself, thank you.

I won't have any more answers until next week as my computer at home hasn't been hooked up at the rental house since the flood ruined my keyboard and printer.

Later
Dave
 
Rods

Untill all of this happenned, I never new such rods existed.

The incident a few years back was, I believe, a cut off cleaning rod, not a specific manufactured piece used to knock stuck bullets out of a barrel.

I certainly do not want to make light of any safety issues. But most of us are the type of citizens who get sick and tired of being over regulated, whether it be the government, or a sanctioning body.

We simply have to be more careful. For those of us who shoot thousands of rounds a year, complacency can set in. Sometimes it takes a wake up call, as tragic as it might be, to shock us back to reality.

Let's let common sense prevail.........jackie
 
Gentlemen ...

Here's a quick rule to be posted in large bright letters at each range.

"A STUCK BULLET IN A RIFLE BARREL WILL ONLY BE DISLODGED WITH A WOODEN DOWEL THAT EXTENDS 10 INCHES LONGER THAN THE BARREL WITH A RED FLAG ATTACHED THAT IS THREE INCHES WIDE BY 6 INCHES LONG. NO OTHER DEVICES ARE PERMITTED"

Anyother suggestions are welcome. Art
 
abintx said:
Anyother suggestions are welcome.
Click to expand...
Art,

In open range shooting here in Australia, removing stuck cases, projectiles & live rounds can only be carried out by or under the supervision of the range officer in charge of the detail. In such instances, I reckon it might be more uniformly safer that way than allowing the dork who screwed up in the first instance another chance at martyrdom.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top