Powder contamination

[B.Habermehl]

Upon pulling the ball from my .58 cal hunting rifle I found the first 1/4 inch of powder, obviously lube contaminated clinging to the ball. The gun was loaded for a good week or so. This is some thing to keep in mind. I usually load a thin cardboard wad between the powder and ball, but didn't bother this time. You betcha I used the card wad this time! One more evening to hunt, Monday after work.  BJH

[Greyfeather]

And if you don't mind, would you tell us what lube, patch info, and how was the patch lubricated. 1/4" of contaminated powder is significant.
John

[Daryl]

That's important.  Something else that is or would be important, is the ballistics of just such a load.  Does it strike to the sights? Is/was the velocity normal?

These would be the most important aspects of the load left over a period of time. True - to have a meaningful experiment, one with decently repetitive results, would take time.

As I've stated prior, use of a wad changed the accuracy of 2 out of 3 of my rifles, not only group point of impact, but grouping capability. It was degraded with the addition of a thin separation wad. Only the very large bore was uneffected by a wad whereas the higher velocity, higher pressure guns were effected in a negative manner with the addition of a card wad barrier. I did not use an absorbant barrier as I did not want it to wick lube from the patch.

[B.Habermehl]

The combination will shoot to the sights out to 75 yds wich is my personal limit for game. The patch was lubed with crisco. Although I don't use grease based lubes for range use, I use them for hunting.  The .58 is strictly my primary deer hunting rifle. As far as this this rifle is concerned, it does not care if crisco or olive oil is used for lube. I have not putzed around with animal greases such as bear oil, tallow etc. Not having acess to a chrono I don't have any ballistic info. But have fired the ball,patch lube and card combo after two weeks in the barrel. Seemed quite normal in prefomance. My betis, the above mensioned combo with out the card would have had a really noticeable diffierence, after seeing the lube migration I saw.

[Daryl]

The crisco 'damage' may not stop that powder from burning is what I implied, thus wanting to know if that shot went center in previous scenarios.

 Seems it did shoot to the sights at 75yards, but that you've always used a barrier wadon every previous occurance- never one where the powder was against the lubed patch.

As you surmised, there might have been a difference, but it's also possible the 'wetted' powder would have burned just fine - without being tested, we'll never know.

Someone with a range litterly out their back door could easily test the effects of powder contamination.

[Mad Monk]

The crisco 'damage' may not stop that powder from burning is what I implied, thus wanting to know if that shot went center in previous scenarios.

 Seems it did shoot to the sights at 75yards, but that you've always used a barrier wadon every previous occurance- never one where the powder was against the lubed patch.

As you surmised, there might have been a difference, but it's also possible the 'wetted' powder would have burned just fine - without being tested, we'll never know.

Someone with a range litterly out their back door could easily test the effects of powder contamination.

I had the problem of powder contamination by grease lubes when I did my velocity testing.  Which was why I switched to the Lehigh Valley lube for powder testing.  If the powder grains pick up any grease lube on their surfaces they simply burn slower than grains not touched by the lube.  In some cases the slowed grains could be seen leaving the muzzle trailing smoke.

Remember.  BP is a surface burning propellant.  Meaning that when the grains ignite they burn from the surface down to the core.  Any lube on or into the surfaces of the grains acts as an ignition and combustion retardant.  In some cases it did ugly things to shot to shot velocity uniformity.

E. Ogre