How dangerous is shotgun shell ignition outside chamber?

[bushmaster1313]

I can think of several types of hangfires other than in the chamber with the action closed. How dangerous are they with a 12 gauge 00 buck shell:

1 Shell in an open action not in the chamber

2 shell in chamber action open

3 Shell held in hand

4 shell ejected and in the air or on the ground

Thank you

I wait 30 seconds after a dud primer and God willing I do not plan on experiencing any of these.

 

[kostyanj]

I remember that mythbusters did a test setting off different pistol calibers outside a chamber and the only one that did any damage was a .50 (not sure if it was BMG or not). The reason they gave on the show was that since it's set off in the open, the pressure doesn't get nearly as high as if it's in the barrel. Now these were all pistol and rifle cartridges which contain far less powder than a shotshell.

That being said, it would do some damage but not nearly as much as when it goes off in the chamber.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

If fired from within the chamber, the pellets will discharge at full power. If not contained within the chamber, the hull will simply burst open and the inertia (i.e., a body at rest remains at rest and all that) of the pellets will keep them from flying about. You would still not want to be holding the shell in your hand if this happens, though - it would likely sting, bruise or lacerate.

 

[Zane]

3 Shell held in hand

I have seen the results of this one. A guy came into the ER that I work in after pounding on a 12 gauge shell with a hammer while holding it. He was holding the business end away from him.

His left hand was bloodied, but not seriously injured. There weren't even any large/deep cuts. He was not struck by any pellets we could find. The major injury was to his eye. He sustained a deep gash in his cornea and ruptured the globe. No pellets were found. I'm assuming it was from burning powder as there was stippling on his face. He may have taken a piece of plastic across the eye, however nothing was found.

 

[TheNev]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ylCFeMbgw

Shotgun shell being ignited on a table by a BB or pellet.

 

[DMK]

A guy came into the ER that I work in after pounding on a 12 gauge shell with a hammer while holding it.

What the..?

Real rocket scientist, that one.

 

[Manco]

Note that the following is not based on experience, but speculation--perhaps somebody with experience can chime in and show how dangerous a little knowledge can be.

1 Shell in an open action not in the chamber

In all cases it depends on how contained the propellant is--the more contained it is, the more like a small grenade it will behave. If enough pressure builds up quickly before it can be vented, then the shotgun's receiver may rupture and send out some shrapnel. On the other hand, if there is enough space to freely expel the pellets (at a quick but modest speed compared to shooting them) and gas, then that's what will happen (and the shooter could potentially be injured).

2 shell in chamber action open

I imagine that with the breech unlocked and separated, the heavy buckshot will be propelled slightly into the barrel, while the shotshell case will be violently propelled backward due to blowback, breaking the seal with the chamber and venting fire and gas out of the ejection port (and maybe the case as well). As with #1, if the pressure gets too high, then the receiver could rupture.

3 Shell held in hand

It's probably a lot like having a good-sized firecracker explode in your hand. If you're lucky it will vent in the direction opposite the base, sending the buckshot flying at unimpressive speed (still might hurt some if they hit you or somebody else), and if you're unlucky then your hand may be severely injured.

4 shell ejected and in the air or on the ground

It'll go off like a firecracker once again, but the buckshot will hardly move while the rest of the case will go flying pretty fast wherever it happens to be pointed. It will probably have enough power to injure, although nothing like a bullet or shot.

These are my guesses, anyway. I hope I'll never have to find out for real.

 

[Zane]

What the..?

Real rocket scientist, that one.

Keeps me in business.

The greatest words I can hear: "Hey, hold my beer and watch this..."

 

[Manco]

I remember that mythbusters did a test setting off different pistol calibers outside a chamber and the only one that did any damage was a .50 (not sure if it was BMG or not).

I'm pretty sure it was a .50 BMG, and being so large, the flying cartridge case did some damage to the oven it was being cooked in (the bullet hardly moved because it's much more massive).

The reason they gave on the show was that since it's set off in the open, the pressure doesn't get nearly as high as if it's in the barrel.

Sure, because once the bullet and case are separated, there is no longer anything to tightly contain and direct the gases being generated--that's why barrels are so important.

However, in general I wouldn't take anything the MythBusters say regarding physics seriously, even when it concerns firearms. They've gotten so much wrong--sometimes dead wrong--over the years, and I think they could really use a consultant in such matters. Take for example the episode in which they tested whether it is possible to make bullets (fired out of smoothbore barrels) curve by swinging the gun around like in the movie "Wanted". To start with, the idea is so silly that it's not even worth the effort to test because bullets will always travel in a straight line due to inertia and a force would have to be applied as it is flying to make it curve. In short, it's not possible to do it that way. Well, DUH! So they set up a test anyway, swinging their guns (also with a mechanical arm!) and firing through three sheets in order to see whether a laser can pass through all three holes, which would indicate a straight path. The result was that the laser did pass through all three holes of every shot, which led them to conclude that the bullets were flying absolutely straight. Well, they may have accidentally gotten the correct answer, but they forgot the fact that the bullets are in fact curving downward because of gravity, which shows how useless their test was to begin with due to imprecision. :banghead: Actually, it's even more complicated than that, but I've digressed enough as it is.

Now these were all pistol and rifle cartridges which contain far less powder than a shotshell.

I wouldn't say that a .50 BMG cartridge contains less powder than a 12-gauge shotshell. There are pistol calibers that are more energetic than 12-gauge, as well, which implies they contain more powder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40ylCFeMbgw

Shotgun shell being ignited on a table by a BB or pellet.

Keep in mind that this is not the same scenario as any in the original post. The lead shot had been removed, for one thing.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

When ammunition explodes outside the barrel, the projectile is not the danger: the case is more likely to do damage. Being light and not aerodynamic, it is close range damage.
I have enbedded shotshells in a clay bank and shot the primers with a .22 rifle; the explosion is not great, but it would damage your hand if you held one and hit it with a hammer.

 

[tominct]

Many years ago when we were a bit less smart, my buddy and I decided to see what would happen if we shot out the primer on an uncontained shotgun shell, at about 20 or 30 feet.
After many attempts, one of us hit the primer. The shot didn't go far (a couple of feet, with no real force) but the hull, having much less mass than the shot/wad/powder, came flying back at us. Real fast.
I suppose it could have put out an eye or made a bruise, but otherwise no real danger.

 

[TheNev]

Keep in mind that this is not the same scenario as any in the original post. The lead shot had been removed, for one thing.

Correct, but even with the shot intact, the shell would act the same way. No barrel to support the shell = shell bursts.

 

[Manco]

Correct, but even with the shot intact, the shell would act the same way. No barrel to support the shell = shell bursts.

Right, but in the video it holds together just well enough to expel the rest of its contents out the front, and with the shot intact the base would likely fly in the opposite direction, as others who have tried it pointed out (unless the pellet that hit the primer hit it hard and square enough to cancel the momentum of the base).

 

[double bogey]

A little different, but 30 or so years ago when my dad smoked, he threw a cigarette out and it went in the back of his truck. We had been dove hunting and one of the game bags caught on fire. we heard the popping noise and stopped to see what it was. The shells were already all fired, but each shell had a blown hole right above the brass where the pressure relieved, and the shot was still in the hull. I was suprised none of the shot went out.

I had a brother in law that would throw .22 bullets in the campfire. They would pop but never saw any shrapnel, I made him stop by theatening to kick his a**, as that was one of the stupidest things I have seen. Reminds me of the old redneck "watch this" scenario.

 

[dubbleA]

3 Shell held in hand

I witnessed a 12 ga shotshell go off in a guys hand once. We were shooting 5 stand and a youngman was using a Beretta 391 and would close the action by hitting the bolt release button with a shotshell. Well I was standing in the station to the right of him looking right at him when it happened. He dropped his first shell into the gun and hit the button to close the bolt, he must have hit the primer in the shell just right and went off in his hand.
The sound was a loud pop but nothing like being fired in a chamber. There was a small puff of blackish smoke too. The fella turned white as a ghost as he flung the shell. Upon inspection, the shell simply split down the side and the wad and shot were still intact.
Other than some back smudge and redness on his hand he was ok but I think he learned his lesson on using a shotshell to close the action on his gun.

On another note when younger I once had a .22 shell go off when I was loading a magazine and it was droped on a tile floor. The case ruptured and went into a few pieces one of which stuck in my knee but was easily removed, the 36gr bullet stayed where the shell dropped. Another .22 shell went off when I closed the door in my pickup, apparently it was dropped on the floor board and eventually made it's way into the door jamb .

 

[CajunBass]

Back when I was a young fellow, I worked on a farm. The two brothers who owned the farm were both goose/duck hunters. One of them was standing next to the pickup, one day, talking to a buddy, and picked up a shotgun shell off the dash, and just started to tap it against the side of the truck. After a few taps, it went off in his hand.

I don't remember any particular damage to his hand, but I do remember it scared the snot out of him.

 

[JimKirk]

When I was in the eighth grade, a guy stuck a 30/30 bullet into the bank of a ditch and shot it with a BB pistol. He was smart enough(??) to put his left hand up in front of his face, the hull went fairly deep into the Palm of his hand. I remember him wearing a big bandage for two weeks.
Last time I saw him, I asked if he had shot any 30/30s lately. He commented that he had but they where in his Win 94... he must have smarten up a little by now.

Jimmy K

 

[FROGO207]

DO NOT DO THIS BAD IDEA

When I was a teenager (back in the stoneage) my two cousins and I would put shotgun shells on top of the woodstove and bet on which one would go off first. When the plastic melted and the primer would go off there was a small pop and a puff of smoke with the lead sort of falling over onto the hot stove top. the only ones that were fun were the paper ones as they would pop with a loud crack like a firecracker and send the innards out a little. No one hurt but got yelled at frequently cause the stove smelled like burning plastic.

 

[paintballdude902]

when i was a kid we would super glue a bb to the primer of a shot shell, throw it up in the air and run. they normally went off with the second or third toss making a decent pop but thats it

 

[Driftertank]

Once found a live shotshell at the range, and decided to set it up, primer toward me, on a box and take potshots at it with a .22. One round skimmed the case at one point, gouging the side of the powdercup. We set it up again, and a few shots later, I bullseyed the primer. Must say it was less than impressive. There was a faint pop, not even like a firecracker, and the shell jumped a few feet off the box. No big kaboom, no splatter effect. Mind you, as I said the cup was ruptured before it cooked off, so it probably wasn't particularly relevant to the question. Still, I wouldn't want one to cook off in my hand...

 

[RyanM]

Sounds like 12 gauge rounds in particular aren't too dangerous. But that's not going to be true of everything, including every single brand of shotshell. You'll notice in that one video, the vast majority of the powder flew out without burning, which means it was one of the powders that requires compression/confinement. A more sensitive powder would probably make a pretty impressive fireball.

I believe a member here lost a large portion of one hand and a couple fingers off the other, as a kid while playing with some type of blank cartridge and managing to ignite it.

 

[Owen Sparks]

I had a live shot shell go off IN MY HAND!

Many years ago when I first started loading I was experimenting with loading buckshot and went to the range to test a batch with a buddy. After returning home I noticed one unfired shell in the bucket of empties. Upon further examination I found that the primer was dented. I assumed (big mistake) that I had failed to replace the spent primer in this particular case before reloading it. In reality it was a dud that still contained live components! I attempted to salvage the expensive components by removing the spent primer and replacing it. This would be easy to accomplish by drilling a small hole in the spent primer and prying it out with a pair of needle nose pliers and replacing it with a new primer. I started by holding the live shell clenched in my closed fist and began drilling with a Dremal tool. After a few seconds there was a loud POP! It felt like someone had slapped my hand with a vigorous ‘high five’ and the shell and Dremel tool were gone.

After I regained my composure and realized that I was not hurt, I began to piece together what happened. The shot, wad and a large amount of unburned powder were on the floor. The shell was found on the other side of the room with the crimp opened and a split down one side. The primer was missing. The Dremel tool was on the floor still running and seemed all right until I noticed that the bit was wobbling a little because the shaft was bent. This damage was probably due to being dropped rather than having a primer pop on it. There was also a half moon shaped dent in the sheet rock ceiling where the brass end of the shell hit at a 45degree angle.

So, how dangerous is shotgun shell ignition outside chamber? Obviously not very. While I don't recomend replicating my stupid stunt, I can say that smokless powder does not detonate without being in the tight confines of a proper barrel and most if not all of the explosion was limited the primer. If it had been a black powder shell though, I probably would not be typing this, at least not with my fingers.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Dented primer does not always mean fired or complete dud

Bet if it had been put in the shotgun and given a second strike, it would have fired.

Just for the heck of it, I went through the .22s discarded in the bad ammo box at the range with a .22 Rumanian army training rifle, chambering the once-struck .22 rounds so the firing pin would strike the opposite side of the rim: over half of them fired. Another time, with a double action .380 that fired Winchester shells fine, I had some Czechoslovakian shells that often took a second or third strike to fire (hard primer in the shell, light hammerspring).

 

[eye5600]

However, in general I wouldn't take anything the MythBusters say regarding physics seriously, even when it concerns firearms. They've gotten so much wrong--sometimes dead wrong--over the years, and I think they could really use a consultant in such matters.

It's show business. I'm sure they (or at least Grant, Jamie, and Adam) knew damn well that you can't make a bullet curve that way. The idea is to illustrate it so the audience has a good time and gets the idea. Same with many other experiments, and yes, they do get stuff wrong.