Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How much powder in a shotgun shell?

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by ChaoSS, Dec 8, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    I just finished watching a mythbusters episode where they fired a 37 pound ball 80 yards with one shotgun shell full of black powder, but they didn't say how many grains that was? Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how much powder that would be if you filled, say, a 3 inch 12 gauge shell completely full of powder?
     
  2. justashooter in pa

    justashooter in pa member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Messages:
    358
    without doing it to find out, i would say somewhere close to 450-500 grains. this estimate based upon experience loading black powder shotgun shells for use in older doubles.

    80 yards isn't far. they should try the same amount of powder in a 2 gauge with round ball (1/2 pound) if they really want to do something cool.
     
  3. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    No, it's not very far, it was an experimental shoot, they did others with more powder, I was just wondering how much that really was compared to, say, how much goes in a regular shotgun load, or my .38, or whatever.
     
  4. freakshow10mm

    freakshow10mm member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,951
    Regular 12ga load is about 40-45 grains or so. So the previous estimate of 450-500gr is pretty close I think.
     
  5. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    Haven't loaded shotshells in a while, but I recall the charge being in the 25 to 30 grain range. That was for 12 gauge 2-3/4 shells w/ 1-1/4 oz load using Hercules powder. Can't speak of other gauges/lengths.
     
  6. Galil5.56

    Galil5.56 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,098
    Don't know which "F" powder they used, but I took an old style 2 3/4", 12 ga poly-formed/Riefenhauser style Wincherster shotshell with the mouth fully opened, filled it flat with GOEX 3F, and my Dillon D-Terminator says 249.6 grains.

    These old WW shells have a very low base wad, and a lot of volume, and IMO would represent as large a volume dropped charge as you can find aside from perhaps an ACTIVE hull, which I have but did not use.
     
  7. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
  8. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    Yeah, for some reason I always thought that modern smokeless powder was more powerful than the older black powder, till recently, I saw something that mentioned that the black powder was actually a bigger boom. Guess that's what you get for relying on assumptions.

    Thanks for the info guys, a few hundred grains is close enough, I'm not planning on setting off a cannon myself, it was just a curiosity thing.
     
  9. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    Smokeless powder is more powerful.

    Thats why it doesn't take as much of it to reach much higher velocity then you can get with black powder.

    The difference is that smokeless powder burns and gradually builds up pressure.
    Black powder just basically explodes.

    rc
     
  10. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    Ok, that makes sense then.
     
  11. ljnowell

    ljnowell Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2008
    Messages:
    6,194
    Location:
    The Peoples Republic of IL
    It was always explained this way to me too, "Smokeless powder is a propellant, black powder is an explosive."
     
  12. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    Well, black powder doesn't really detonate or explode either, unless it is tightly confined.

    It just burns awful fast!

    As an example, primers explode.
    Powders burn.
    Some way faster then others is all.

    rc
     
  13. atblis

    atblis Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    4,531
    Location:
    Neither here nor there
    I think blackpowder has a lot deadweight in it. Not very energy dense.
     
  14. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    While I'm in stupid question mode.....

    Does that mean that on a black powder gun the barrel length has less of an effect on speed? I know the gasses keep pushing the bullet down the barrel whether anything is burning or not, but do smokeless powders keep burning out the end of the barrel more than black powder, making the barrel length have more of an effect on the velocity?

    (hope that makes sense what I'm trying to ask)
     
  15. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    As already noted, black powder burns so fast it seems like it explodes.
    As such, it gets it over with almost instantly and no longer produces any more gas.

    Smokeless powder burn rate can be adjusted from very fast to very slow during manufacture.
    So the powder correct burn rate can be selected for the cartridge in question.
    It all burns in or very close to the chamber just like black powder, but it continues to generate gas pressure over a longer time period depending on the burn rate.

    So in effect, black powder smacks the bullet a hard whack and is done producing pressure.
    Smokeless powder continues to burn and produce expanding gas longer, and shoves the bullet all the way down the barrel.

    As for barrel length?
    Old time black powder rifles generally had very long barrels.
    The reason is that the initial explosion blew the rest of the very large charge of BP out the muzzle of a short barrel before all of it could ignite.

    This seems to contradict what we already said about black powder all going off instantly.
    But when you are measuring bullet dwell time in the bore in single digit milliseconds, "instantly" takes on a different meaning.

    rc
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2009
  16. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    True, but smokeless requires more confinement. I learned this trying to duplicate fireworks with granddad's Bullseye. Ain't it great being an immortal kid? All explosives have "burn rates." High and low order explosions are determined by burn rate. I think the cutoff is somewhere around 13,000 feet per second. The PETN in det cord burns at 4.5 miles per second, if memory serves. Someone correct me if my numbers are off; long time since '77.
     
  17. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    4.5 miles per second? As in, you light off one end and the other end, 4.5 miles away, goes off a second later?
     
  18. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    Yes. SGT (I've forgotten his name) explained it this way: "We could blow the colonel a new one in less than a second."
     
  19. ChaoSS

    ChaoSS Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,111
    That's over 20,000 fps, that's almost 20 times to speed of sound. Hot Damn....
     
  20. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    48,375
    Location:
    Alabama
    The problem with smokeless powder when it was first invented was it was too powerful and too fast burning to be useful in small arms. They had to invent ways to slow it down.
     
  21. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    Det cord detonates at a speed of between 7,000–8,000 m/s.
    Or 4.35 to 4.97 miles per second.
    Or 261 to 298 miles per minute.
    Or 15,700 to 17,900 miles per hour.

    All I know for sure is, don't blink or you will miss it!

    That incredible speed is the difference between a controlled explosion, as in any powder charge burning, and a true detonation.

    No firearm ever made could contain a true detonation.

    rc
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2009
  22. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    Amen, brother! We used to set up a series with det cord. Very difficult to tell the first blast from the next. Fun stuff!

    I think a few have inadvertently tried...with less than optimal results.
     
  23. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    Actually, short of starting that whole argument again, they haven't.

    Guns blow up for a lot of reasons, but a true hypersonic shockwave detonation is not one of them.

    Smokeless powder is not capable of supporting a detonation shockwave in less then warehouse or rail car quantities.

    Ever try to make a bomb out of a can of smokeless powder?
    Can't, because a 1 or 8 pound can of any smokeless powder simply cannot be made to detonate, even with a blasting cap & det cord to set it off.

    rc
     
  24. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    I was making a joke.

    Yep. Used to pour blackpowder in a shotgun hull, slip in a piece of dynamite fuse and pack paper in with a pencil. BOOM! Tried the same with Granddad's Bullseye. Fssssssssssssss.
     
  25. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    48,375
    Location:
    Alabama
    Not a whole can, but yes. Works well if you can confine it well. (Think used C02 cartridges and underwater fuse) Don't be close by when it goes off. Actually, don't be anywhere near it, and preferably behind something. :what:

    I wasn't always old and reasonably mature. ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page