Why do handloads fail?

[alsaqr]

None of mine have ever failed (knock on wood) so I don't know what it's like.......

+1
Started reloading in the mid 60s. Have loaded high hundreds of thousands of rounds; maybe even more than a million. Never had a misfire or malfunction with one of my reloaded rounds. I cannot say the same for the commercial ammo that I have fired in that same time period.

 

[plinky]

Overall I've had very little trouble with my ammo and trust it for anything that I might need to shoot. I did have one squib years ago from no powder in the round. I was charging each case and immediately seating a bullet. Since that squib, I charge the full loading block and inspect the powder level before seating a bullet. Something in my mind still nags at me to "seal" each round with a bullet as soon as the powder is in the case, but logic tells me that method actually increases the chance for an error.

I also got an upside down primer once using a press mounted auto-prime which was somewhat problematic. Not a safety issue.

Both errors happened when I was shooting mostly handguns and pumping out a lot of rounds. Pushing for speed probably causes errors for many shooters, whether using a single stage, turret or progressive set up.

Aside from speed, I believe that the area of powder handling offers the most potential for a simple mistake with a horrible result. Most manuals have a set of guidelines which will address this danger area, but some like myself don't heed them till we experience the reason for the warning. Usually it's something like this:

*Verify your load data. Double check it. Cross reference it with other data sources. Work up to max levels cautiously.

*Verify that you have selected the powder which is called for. Examine it for anything out of the ordinary (correct appearance, signs of decomposition)

*Have only one powder on your bench at a time. This ensures that you put the right powder in your measure and that you return the unused powder to the proper cannister.

*Ideally, weigh every charge, especially when using a powder which does not flow smoothly through your measure or if you are loading near the max or min levels.

*Even if the powder flows well, spot weigh charges every few rounds.

*When all cases are charged, hold the loading block under a bright light and examine the powder level in each case for any variation high or low.

Of course every phase of reloading has a potential for problems but I'd wager that the vast majority of dangerous situations stem from ignoring one of these guidelines.

 

[jeepmor]

I've had two "no powder" rounds slip into my reloads. Upon thinking it over, I realized these were my setup rounds where I sat with the calipers and bullet puller until I got the COL just right.

Take away from this experience for me. Don't put primers in your setup brass or you'll need a 3/8 dowel to pound out your squib bullet. Also, I now take my setup round and liberally coat it with a magic marker of some sort, along with making sure there is no primer in there also.

I've also had a couple FTFs that were either dust contaminated primers (I did scrounge some off the floor once after a spill) or I did not seat the primer fully as I felt I was slightly crushing them with my RCBS hand primer so I backed off a little bit. I don't do that any more, i seat it very tightly, the ones that I thought I was crushing have "never" failed me.

Some of the soft seated primers did fire on the second try, guess I had to seat them first and break that little crust ring that develops when the primer pushes back against the breech face.

 

[Littlemac]

Seems to have taken a little different tone

There is always lots of talk on these threads about how good "my gun" is, how well my "ammo" works or shoots, but it takes lots of time, money and ability to actually demonstrate or prove up such claims. To make claims of ability and quality using the keyboard is the easy part. It is a whole different world when the proof comes out of your pocket for the sake of bragging rights.

I am not in the habit of providing money to strangers so they can prove their claims. But let me work on it walkalong. A bond or hold back approach might be a way to get more folks with flawless guns and utterly reliable ammo to give these 1k matches a try.

Not near as many claims of quality now as at the start of the thread, at least it seems that way to me. The number crunchers and bean counters can verify that if they so choose. I guess that reloaders are just more humble than shooters, so they just keep their successes to themselves.

LM

 

[Walkalong]

Sounds like you think many of us are full of S***. Maybe you are right, and maybe you are just doubting many folks who have no reason to lie about it.

I admit, there are many more experts on the net than in real life. I just want to wretch sometimes when folks talk about their factory out of the box wonders that can shoot 1/4" MOA every time. :banghead:

I know I have never had a reload not fire, and I am sure their are many more anal reloaders who can say the same, but never say never, just not yet.

Seems to have taken a little different tone

when you came into the discussion on page two.

 

[joneb]

I am not in the habit of providing money to strangers so they can prove their claims. But let me work on it walkalong. A bond or hold back approach might be a way to get more folks with flawless guns and utterly reliable ammo to give these 1k matches a try.

Show me the money and I will show you 1k reloads that go bang, just give me a 30 day heads up, I load on a single stage press

 

[Idano]

I am not in the habit of providing money to strangers so they can prove their claims.

Just curious, how is one BS claim any different then another? I do have to agree I find it hard to believe that anyone who has reload for many years to claim that they have never ever encountered a issue with one of their reloads. However, I do believe that many good reloaders have had so few that they may over look them or not consider them a failure for some other reason. I know I said I had two distinct issues one where I missed a charge and another where I killed the rounds with WD40 but I just recalled another where I had the web blow out of 9mm case. The round fired and then stove piped so I guess that could be considered a failure too. I guess it comes down to how well you define the criteria. By that I mean I have many guns that have shot many thousands rounds without any problem, but not all in one sitting. I have one 22 that has went through more bricks then you are old I am pretty sure since it was my grandfather's and I am still shooting in my forty's without any problems.

So I do believe there are reloaders, that have never had a problem, weren't aware they had a problem, or are swimming in the Nile. On the the flip side should you call BS without proof of your own.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

So I do believe there are reloaders, that have never had a problem, weren't aware they had a problem, or are swimming in the Nile. On the the flip side you should call BS without proof of your own.

While not proof, there is an amazing disparity between claims of reloading prowess and those who show up at the range and shoot reloads in semi-autos.

What Littlemac is getting at is that we have seen this pattern repeated over and over again in matches and the internet claims just don't seem to translate well to reality.

 

[Walkalong]

to get more folks with flawless guns and utterly reliable ammo to give these 1k matches a try

I just want to know when it changed from reloads not working to guns not failing for 1000 rounds.

 

[Idano]

What Littlemac is getting at is that we have seen this pattern repeated over and over again in matches and the Internet claims just don't seem to translate well to reality.

That I do have to agree with you on that point after all this is the Internet. I am sure there are some who make the claims just to fulfill some deep seated emotional issue, but I do think most just don't recall such events with much accuracy. This is definitely true for those getting older I know of instances I would have sworn I remembered something one way when in fact it wasn't so and seen that in my friend too. The only thing I know for a fact anymore is that things are seldom what they appear and the absolute truth is unobtainable even of the purest of heart. Like I said before it's the Internet everything needs to be taken with a grain of sand and you can't let that gain fester under your skin.

 

[joneb]

While not proof, there is an amazing disparity between claims of reloading prowess and those who show up at the range and shoot reloads in semi-autos.

I do not reload on a single stage press and then go shoot a 1000 rnds in one session, if I did I would use a different reloading system that would increase production and most likely decrease reliability.
There are Carpenters that do fine wood work and then there are those that do rough framing , and I would appreciate it if you did not consider both the same.

 

[GaryL]

I have had feed failures during the development stages of working up loads for a new or different gun or caliber or bullet.

I wonder how often this is either skipped or incomplete. I have loads that function fine in one gun but not so well in another. In some cases, it is simply because one has a stronger recoil spring and requires more power to run reliably, but the loads weren't developed for that platform.

Many reloaders have different goals than absolute reliability. Cost, accuracy, reliability, or maybe just for fun, and sometimes all of the above.

I can tell you that my hunting loads are not the same as my plinkers.

 

[Littlemac]

Original premise

I think the original premise of this thread was a comment on how many reloads failed during the ISHOOT 1000 match.

Correct me if I am wrong Double Naught Spy, but isn't one object of that match was to test the functionality of guns that don't fail with a session of 1000 rounds.

My challenge is that if you think your reloads can go 1000 rounds then come to a 1K match and find out what your work is made of? One way to prove it is to show up and shoot them, then you can actually make the claim that yours don't fail.

Otherwise it is like lots of threads on the net. feel good typing

Just my two cents, you mileage may vary of course.

This is your chance to make your claims reality. If your pistol will shoot 1000 rounds of reloads when you pull the trigger, then you Sir or Ma'am have one fine machine and possess a rare talent in addition to your rare pistol. To put it politely, now is your opportunity to walk the walk versus just making the talk.

June a good month for everyone? Usually takes a day to run one of these matches or the most of one day. I know of a range where the owner allows folks to use his range, but instead of not cost or range fee, he keeps the brass.

Now lets hear about all the objections? and why it won't work for you LM

These thought are just from my head. If some of the rocket science folks can come up with a statical derivative that can tell us how many rounds would correctly represent any reloaders talent, I would settle for that. I chose the 1k matches as those show the mettle of the man, the gun and now the bullets along with the willingness to be involved.

No offense, but your type written word on this thread, is not the type of substantial proof to take to the bank on how reliable your handloads are.

You got idea on how to hand this process other than shooting the reloads, I am all ears.

I have a range that can handle close to 50 shooters more if we stagger the squads. June is always nice in God's country. Side matches the next day?

LM

 

[Idano]

I am sorry but I don't think this thread toward any productive direction and probably should be closed by the Moderators. All I see here is an individual making just as an absurd claim as the others but taking the other side the argument but not willing to bear any of the expense. Besides a 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 or 4,000 round shoot will not statically prove anything because the individual could encounter failures the net time out, all it would prove is the individual reloaded and shot X number of rounds one time without a failure.

Mr. Mac you are arguing a moot point because statically there not only is, but there has to be, a number of reloaders that will never encounter a reloading failure just like there are shooters who will never encounter a factory failure. There is nothing perfect including failure. The result you want would require years of data collection involving various componets, equipment and enviorments.

I have had an occasional failure here and there with my reloads over 30 years but I have also had tens of thousands of successes too that have run consecutively. I have also had the same success with factory ammo, mainly shot shells but some with 22 rimfire when I shot competitively on a Junior team.

Remember opinions are like a$$holes every one has one and everyone thinks their's doesn't stink.

 

[1858rem]

i think primers are mostly to blame....

 

[Walkalong]

1.An occasional rare bad primer.

2. Missing/squib charge.

Can't do anything about primers other than a visual check for obvious problems, but we can SEE every powder charge we seat a bullet over. No excuse for missing charges, and if we have a good eye, no excuse for double charges or squib charges.

 

[1858rem]

maybe ill rig a little mirror to my press(lee turret) so i dont have to remove every shell to check the charge anymore...untill i start reloading rifle..then i wont mind taking an hour for 20 shells or less cause i wont shot as many, and want greater accuracy...id also weigh every powder charge, probably bullets and cases too!....no one weighs primers(checking for more or less prime compound than one another?) right?

 

[jjohnson]

Usually "Operator Error" on the Reloader

I think the most common failure is likely human error.

Factory loads simply have less human involvement in their manufacture. Reloaders handle every operation manually - even if you're using a progressive press, it's YOU that make all the adjustments and the mistakes. Most of us who handload are our own 'final inspection' and 'quality control.' I've reloaded for nearly 40 years, and in the past decade, that's at the rate of 12-15 thousand rounds a year.

I've never had a load fail becuase the primer or powder were at fault. I HAVE made sizing errors, somehow got a primer or two upside down:banghead:, and loaded until the crimp die wobbled itself loose. I've loaded squibs three times that I remember for sure, and I know for sure I double charged one.

Each mistake I've made have been lessons that I've corrected for, but I'd still rather carry factory loads (you have the 'Jury' factor if things get out of hand, too - wicked guy made his own killer ammo). I do visually inspect each round for CCW and check them with a gage, and generally carry only from a box of ammo I've already shot a few mags from.

 

[Art Eatman]

I messed up one time with my old Dillon 350 and didn't charge an IPSC-load in .45ACP. Outside of that, I've never had a true failure of any sort. Never a failure with any reload from a C- or O-press.

Back 50+ years ago, I could easily beat factory loads for tight-group accuracy. Mr. Federal has caught up with me in his .243 loads with the Sierra bullets, and in the '06 High Energy stuff.

 

[1858rem]

so maybe the manufacturers are just getting better!

 

[Walkalong]

Manufacturers have gotten a lot better, and old handloaders were a lot of the reason.

so i dont have to remove every shell to check the charge anymore.

With my Projector I can lean forward and see the charge even in tall skinny .357 cases. I have a hole bored in between stations with a Fenix E1 shining down in the case.