.45-70 Cowboy blows up

crs · Post by **crs** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 10:39 am

From a current post on the Accurate Reloading Forum:

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve ... 9271015361

86er · Post by **86er** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:02 am

Something fishy is going on - I don't know if it was with the load, bullet rifle or whatever but that just doesn't sound like the recipe for disaster that it turned out to be. Thanks for providing this info - I reinforced to myself why I went with the Winchester.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:09 am

I've seen too many of these KABOOMs in recent years. That was either a double charge or the wrong powder. That was a catastrophic failure and it wasn't because of the thread diameter of the Marlins barrel.

JMHO

Joe

Post by **Old Savage** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:16 am

There was here I believe a blow up of an older 1886 Win with 5744 sometime back.

The one that happened in our local looked like a two stage ignition in which the bullet was kicked a couple of inches down the barrel then the main charge went off. This was a custom rifle with the Marlin reamed out to use a different case. It had thousands of rounds through it with very good records and the fellow was using a large pistol primer.

Cimarron · Post by **Cimarron** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:27 am

Could the gas check have come off the bullet in the case and caused such a blow up? I have been using 5744 for over a year now in .45-70 Govt. and .45-75 WCF. I am not using gas checked bullets though. 25g of 5744 with a 350g lead bullet leaves the 26" barrel of my Cimarron 1876 at 1365 fps as clocked by my Oehler 35P chronograph. I must admit the heaviest bullet I use in the .45-70 is only 405g from a Lyman mold.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:31 am

becouse the cap key is difficult for me i will not use it any more..
nosing the bullet into the rifile with a hard bullet, and not trimmed cases for a while, and not suspecting high pressures becouse the velocity was not in line with book velocities are certainly suspect but the barrel extra legth was suspect for the extra velocity.. I accept the responsibility for the accident and do not blame anyone else but me.. the gun came totally apart but did its job in protecting me..

Refreshing to hear that these days. Most people don't seem to accept the fact that

a) feces 'happens', and
b) sometimes it's your own fault

Still it is good always to troubleshoot accidents to see what might have caused it, whether gun hardware failure, reloading mistake, operator error, or whatever. Helps make it less likely to happen again.

Life is scary...

Unfortunately, due to close proximity of the magazine port under the barrel, it is not particularly feasible to enlarge these threads. This is too bad, had John Marlin simply moved the magazine tube and loading port 0.050-inch farther below the barrel he could have enlarged the barrel threads by 0.1-inch and eliminated this weakness. The subsequent design would have worked perfectly without any other significant changes! And this does matter; early Marlins, with softer barrel steel, are prone to chamber swelling. Modern guns avoid this fate only because the steel used in the barrels has significantly increased tensile strength.

I always wondered why someone at Marlin didn't increase the 'lift' height (distance between axis of magazine and barrel) to facilitate a stronger receiver. SURELY that wouldn't have required engineering so highly sophisticated that only John Browning himself could have done it. Besides, it would have given them some patent-renewal options, no doubt. Maybe even add just a hair of width to the receiver in that area as well, while at it.

-----------

One reason I like the .444 Marlin 'better' is that the cartridge base is 0.4698" in diameter, vs. 0.5039", leaving 0.0341" more metal. Not alot, but 30% more or so. You never hear of .444 Marlin 'kabooms', but that may just be because they are way more scarce than .45-70's are.

Of course 'Ruger' loads are something I'd only have around if I had a No. 1 Ruger... reminds me I want one...

-----------

I have to wonder if you had a double charge or if a SEE occurred.

Anyone know what an 'SEE' is...?

Post by **Hobie** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:58 pm

Reading his post I'm lead to believe there was a problem with the load not the rifle. Somehow he screwed up the charge, had a heavy crimp on a bullet that was run right into the lands and all this resulted in the loss of the rifle. This is, apparently how most all Marlins of the 336/1895 type come apart. I'm glad he his relatively well.

Thunder50 · Post by **Thunder50** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:42 pm

Secondary Explosion Effect? S.E.E.

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 11:50 am

"Other possible foolish problems with what i thought was a minimum load was a .460 diameter bullet 509 grains nosed into the rifling, and 25 bullets fired with breach leading but visible at this time. it does not look severe.."

.

A 500gr .460" slug trying to swage down to fit the bore... more leading in the barrel...who really knows how much?... Wow. I am also glad He wasn't badly hurt.

Mike D. · Post by **Mike D.** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:22 pm

It's entirely possible that the bullet was forced into the rifling and actually backed into the case causing a severely compacted powder charge. IMO, the 336 Marlin should have never beenchambered for the .45-70. Too much crammed into a small space which forced minimal tolerances. Many of them have functioned well over the years, but to me they are not trustworthy like the 1886 Winchester. Sorry, Marlin fans, but that's all there is to it.

Another thing that bugs me. Why in the world do you need 500 grain bullets? Just because? Nothing on this continent, not to mention others, can withstand the effects of a 350 grain bullet from a well loaded .45-70 cartridge. I haven't bothered to go as high as the old 405 for many years. Much better and lighter bullets are available today.

bgmkithaca · Post by **bgmkithaca** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:40 pm

I will give some information on a wildcat that I developed a few years ago on a shortened up .444 case necked down to
.375 for a legal deer hunting cartridge in Indiana. I had worked with it quite a bit with a chronograph and had a pretty good handle on it EXCEPT for one thing-seating bullets into the lands. The load I was working with was rather mild - almost no
case head expansion and quite accurate, thought I would seat the bullets out into the rifling. Since the load was pretty mild I did not reduce the powder charge-very unwise on my part. The bullets were cast bullets of my own design and sized .0015
over bore diameter with a bhn of 15 + or -. The first shot gave an increase of almost 400 fps and thinking it was a fluke tried again and got a little over 400 fps. These were weighed charges with the only difference being the seating depth from prior.
I don't know what the pressure increase may have been but must have been substantial. Fortunatly it did'nt appear to be an over load as I can get higher velocity with bigger charges and bullets seated away from the riflings . Makes me wonder if the shooter above got into something like this. I sure got my eyes opened on this.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:57 pm

Mike D. wrote:It's entirely possible that the bullet was forced into the rifling and actually backed into the case causing a severely compacted powder charge. IMO, the 336 Marlin should have never beenchambered for the .45-70. Too much crammed into a small space which forced minimal tolerances. Many of them have functioned well over the years, but to me they are not trustworthy like the 1886 Winchester. Sorry, Marlin fans, but that's all there is to it.

Another thing that bugs me. Why in the world do you need 500 grain bullets? Just because? Nothing on this continent, not to mention others, can withstand the effects of a 350 grain bullet from a well loaded .45-70 cartridge. I haven't bothered to go as high as the old 405 for many years. Much better and lighter bullets are available today.

Mike,
I think it's a continuing case of magnumitus. Since the advent of the Ruger BH in .45 Colt and the resulting magnumizing of that old cartridge people have gone off the deep end putting ever heavier bullets into long established cartridges. I guess they swallowed the old saw: "if a little is good, a lot will be better".
For some of the old original black powder cartridge that originally came with round nosed bullets I can see improving the bullets shape. But I see little reason for the extra heavy for caliber bullets.
With all the blown up guns we are seeing I believe the magnumitus curse is becoming an epidemic.

Joe

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 2:18 pm

Well, the information provided certainly does allow for several scenarios that could cause problems... but I would vote double charge not knowing otherwise.... that was a very dramatic blow-up...

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:46 pm

Mike D. wrote:IMO, the 336 Marlin should have never beenchambered for the .45-70. Too much crammed into a small space which forced minimal tolerances. Many of them have functioned well over the years, but to me they are not trustworthy like the 1886 Winchester. Sorry, Marlin fans, but that's all there is to it.
---------------------------
Why in the world do you need 500 grain bullets? Just because?
Nothing on this continent, not to mention others, can withstand the effects of a 350 grain bullet from a well loaded .45-70 cartridge.

Those are both reasons I like my .444 Marlin - just a bit more metal around the cartridge case, and if I stick within the bullet-size/weight & load limits I'm comfortable with in that action, I can't do anything 'better' with the .45-70 than the .444 will do.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:14 pm

Did the barrel let go at the threads? Did not catch that part, but will re read.

Swampman · Post by **Swampman** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:34 pm

It wasn't the rifle. It was owner induced for sure. Marlins are strong as hell.

Terry Murbach · Post by **Terry Murbach** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:50 pm

THIS IS A SIMPLE CASE OF WAY TOO MUCH PRESSURE AND WAY TOO MUCH PROPELLENT THAT RIPPED THE ACTION ASSUNDER AT EACH PLACE THE GAS WAS ESCAPING. THIS IS EASILY DUPLICATED IN THE LAB.
EVERYTIME I SEE PHOTOS LIKE THIS AND HEAR THE IGNORENT LAME EXCUSES I WANT TO PUT A 10D NOCONA RIGHT IN SOMEONE'S BACKSIDE. FOOLS !!!!

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:37 pm

The thing many folks fail to include in their load development is that pressure often increases exponentially, not arithmetically. And when you start altering other parameters without regard to this simple fact, the factors themselves become unpredictable.

I see three major problems: differing crimps, bullet seating depths and and apparent inability to read a loading guide.

5744 (powder) 500 LC FP (bullet weight & style) 25.2 (min. charge) 1,265 (velocity) 28.0 1,400 27,900 (max charge & velocity) 2.550(COL)

A minimum load absolutely SHOULDN'T be a problem if that formula is followed. But, changing from a .458 bullet to a .460, a plain base to a gas check, seating into the lands; all three are going to increase pressure over what the book states. How much is anyone's guess. What happened to the admonishment to reduce load charge ANY TIME you change any component of the formula. I was taught to reduce the powder charge by at LEAST 10% when you vary from the exact formula in the load manual. With only a 2.8 grain variance between the minimum and maximum loads for this bullet weight, it's clear to me that the shooter failed in doing the most basic of load development... WORK UP TO each load. And forgive me, but... "...looked into each case with a flashlight..." isn't exactly a very scientific methodology to ensure your powder charge is correct! Yes, it might prevent you from doubling the powder charge; but again, with only a 2.8 grain difference between the min & max, a more EXACT way is needed.

I'll stick with the belief that 25 rounds of a slightly more than max load with the bullet into the rifling fatigued the metal to the point that failure was the only result that could be expected.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but simply said, the fact that the shooter takes responsibility for his actions is inadequate. He needs to recognize that he didn't take due caution in changing his loads.

P.S.: Thank you Terry. You're exactly right.

FWiedner · Post by **FWiedner** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:54 pm

Hot load, narrow throat, heavy bullet...

What could go wrong?

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 9:03 pm

I did some pressure testing on the 45-70 with a noted 525gr (actually 540+ grain weight) bullet and it scared the poop out of me how fast pressures rose. I never got up to the prescribed load (or velocity) that floats on the internet and I'm not adverse to high pressures. It is a ridiculously heavy weight for the cartridge, takes up way too much powder space forcing the use of even faster powders, and very touchy as to what you are going to get for pressure. Any slight variable will send it into pressures that anyone that is sane wants nothing to do with. And for messing in that area, 5744 is NOT the powder to do it with. I always thought you guys were in the "heavier is better" crowd

. I'm glad there are a few that agree with me.

CowboyTutt · Post by **CowboyTutt** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 9:43 pm

What Hobie, Terry and Griff said +1. Glad he survived. -Tutt

olyinaz · Post by **olyinaz** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:05 am

J Miller wrote: I guess they swallowed the old saw: "if a little is good, a lot will be better". For some of the old original black powder cartridge that originally came with round nosed bullets I can see improving the bullets shape. But I see little reason for the extra heavy for caliber bullets. With all the blown up guns we are seeing I believe the magnumitus curse is becoming an epidemic.

Joe

Just me talkin', but I doubut it. I think that the internet causes us to hear all blowed up gun stories these days instead of just the ones from the local club that we used to hear about in days gone by.

Cheers,
Oly

Swampman · Post by **Swampman** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:46 am

I see no reason to hotrod the old girl. The .45-70 is enough cartridge even in it's Trapdoor loadings.

williamranks · Post by **williamranks** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:20 am

Did I see something in Handloader this month about powder charges that don't fill the case?
Saw it at the dentist's.
When the primer fires and part of the charge ignites and pushes the bullet into the rifling, then the rest of the charge goes off with the bore plugged with the bullet.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:15 am

williamranks wrote:Did I see something in Handloader this month about powder charges that don't fill the case?
Saw it at the dentist's.
When the primer fires and part of the charge ignites and pushes the bullet into the rifling, then the rest of the charge goes off with the bore plugged with the bullet.

William,

There's an awful lot of perfectly safe, sane, well used loads that don't fill the case of any number of cartridges. Yes, some powders are position sensitive and require them to be against the primer to ignite reliably. 5744 ain't one of them. I use a 29 grain charge in my .40-90SBN with both 330 grain and 350 grain PB lead boolits all the time. Gives excellent ignition and fairly reliable SD and ES numbers (8.3 & 19 respectively). When I got this rifle (1987), there was NO published data. Even today there is VERY little actually published. Several powder companies refused to give me any information about any of their powders. Wouldn't even do any calculations based on case volume. So, at first I just had "word-of-mouth" loads to start with, as no one I knew actually loaded for this cartridge... Shiloh Sharp's had 2 loads they said to use. In fact, a couple of people I spoke to said to just use any load for the lever action .45-70s with any powder that wasn't position sensitive, as the .40-90SBN case is about a ½" longer than a .45-70, so less volume is used. Accurate wasn't so stingy with their info. They gave me this 29 grain load as max., not due to pressure, but rather due to speed, since it pushes that 350 pill along at an ave. 1582fps. Which is only 6 fps faster than a 90 grain FFg Goex load with the same bullet!

As always, one must research diligently to ascertain a realistic starting point, and watch carefully as one approaches published maximum loads. Not all guns will accept a maximum load, as they vary dimensionally. It is virtually impossible to make two chambers identical... even using the same machinery and cutting tools. And that doesn't even allow for varying other factors in building a cartridge... which I believe were ignored in this instance.

piller · Post by **piller** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:22 am

I am certainly no expert. I do, however, have a little training in metallurgy, and I am not an idiot (at least most times). It really looks like an error on the operators part with an overcharge or over pressure. I have had one firearm come apart and that was from remanufactured loads I bought. Stupid move. They were 9mm and they caused the pistol to come apart. The pistol was actually made to be able to handle this and I had no scratches. I sent the pistol back and it was fixed by the manufacturer. When I pulled the bullets on the rest of the rounds, I measured the weight of the powder, and it was more than any weight charge which my 3 books listed. I reused the bullets, and had a nice little fire in the coffee can which I still have just for disposing of suspect powder. Based on my experience, the owner did something wrong in a big way.

williamranks · Post by **williamranks** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:43 am

Griff,
I stick with 33 gr of 4198 or 45 gr of Varget behind a 400 gr Lasercast in the 45-70.
It's all the thump I can stand.
Have you tried Trailboss for the 45-90?

Bill

KWK · Post by **KWK** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:15 pm

Mike D. wrote:Why in the world do you need 500 grain bullets?

Whelen once wrote the .45-70-500 was one of the finest big game loads available -- when he was writing circa WW-I. He put it ahead of the .30-40-220 and in the same league as the .30-06, .35 WCF, and .405 WCF. Of course, it was then loaded to 1200 fps; today people try to mimic a British elephant rifle with it. On the other hand, the guy was only trying for 1200 fps...

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:18 pm

Mike D. wrote: IMO, the 336 Marlin should have never beenchambered for the .45-70. Another thing that bugs me. Why in the world do you need 500 grain bullets? Just because?

Yep you have your "IMO" and I have mine !

Kinda like what we sit on don't you think

Paul Jenkins · Post by **Paul Jenkins** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:48 pm

Folks,
The 535 gr. bullet was designed for & meant for BP. I have shot many, better than a thousand
535 with 70 grs BP. 1200FPS. I can't understand wanting more punishment than that. I am a target shooter and have found in almost all loadings, less is the most accurate, except BP, and the most accurate is the most deadly. Glad no one was hurt.

Rimfire McNutjob · Post by **Rimfire McNutjob** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:17 pm

Didn't Jack bulge an 1886 chamber a few years back with 5744? It's been a while and I may be off but I thought someone had some problems with 5744.

6pt-sika · Post by **6pt-sika** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:34 pm

In my circa 1972 Marlin "New Model 1895" I shoot the BallistiCast 462-550GC sometimes . I push it with 39 grains of H322 and the last time I ran it over a Chrony I got an average of 1476 FPS . And actually it isn't that tough a load as far as recoil is concerned .

My next heaviest 45-70 bullet for the Marlin is the now defuct BRP 462-465GC pushed with 44.5 grains of H322 . Same day I clocked the 550 grainer I clocked this 465 grainer and got an average of 1647 FPS outta this one .

Both these loads are comfortable to shoot (atleast for me).

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:06 pm

When faced with a number of options, the simplest is most often the answer. Way to much powder!!!!

w30wcf · Post by **w30wcf** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:25 am

Very sorry to here of this. The unfortunate fellow mentioned that he was using the RCBS 500 gr bullet.

The RCBS 500 gr bullet seats almost 3/8" deeper into the case than the standard round nosed 500 gr bullet*reducing case capacity which, in turn, will raise pressures.

Personally, I use a slower burning powder than 5744 with the RCBS bullet because of the reduced case capacity.

*Way too long to feed through the magazine of the Marlin.

w30wcf

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:50 am

As Paul Harvey said on the radio used to say "thats the rest of the story"....3/8" would no doubt make a big difference in pressure.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/de ... ber=305466

KWK · Post by **KWK** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:25 am

A little web searching turned up something I didn't know: The original 45-70-500 gn load was 2.8" long. In retrospect, that was obvious, for you couldn't get the -70- part in the same case with a longer bullet.

So, to get the original ballistics in a Marlin, smokeless is required. Hodgdon's data suggests 1200 fps is easy to get at Trapdoor pressures; between 4198 and 3031 is the required powder speed.

The current Accurate data says 5744 should work fine. I've not used the stuff, but I've read it's of low density. Is it even possible to double charge the starting load of 23 gn? The long bullet problem posted recently seems to be the best answer.

An aside: Accurate data used to cover a very wide range of cartridges, and nearly all were done in pressure barrels. Did they sell off all those pressure barrels?

hightime · Post by **hightime** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:19 pm

I think this post maybe the most valuable of the forum. At least for me so far. If it just gets you to rethink. On my post '' my admission of guilt'' you will see that just from reading this post , I did a double check of some loading math I did last fall and found out I had gone farther into the danger zone that I intended. So as unfortunate as this accident was, it does help others avoid their own problems.

Owen

Paladin · Post by **Paladin** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:08 pm

Charles wrote:When faced with a number of options, the simplest is most often the answer. Way to much powder!!!!

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
(Latin for "Entities should not be multiplied more than necessary"). That is, the fewer assumptions an explanation of a phenomenon depends on, the better it is.
Occam's Razor

Post by **Old Savage** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 3:36 pm

I'll repeat this for hightime's benefit. It appears from the Speer loading manual you were not over limit for modern lever actions but nearer the low end of the range they give. It appears you figured it about right for that load with the Speer 400 gr bullet. What are you loading for and what did you think the load would produce? Of course proper procedure and care are always to be recommended in reloading.

hightime · Post by **hightime** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:56 pm

Well there's another lucky break. How long can my luck hold?

Owen

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:53 pm

williamranks wrote:Griff,
I stick with 33 gr of 4198 or 45 gr of Varget behind a 400 gr Lasercast in the 45-70.
It's all the thump I can stand.
Have you tried Trailboss for the 45-90?
Bill

No, although, I have a can, I haven't. There's no data for my .40-90SBN in any powder manual (except M.Venturino & S. Garbe's BP Primer, & then only for BP). In my 1886 .45-70 I only use 31 grains of 5744 behind a 325 RCBS bullet. Plenty for what I might need. Any faster & I get leading.

stretch · Post by **stretch** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 8:39 am

What Griff, Hobie, and Terry said.

This guy made several MAJOR changes to his load
without working up from scratch, checking how it
chambered, whether the bullet was pushed back into
the case upon chambering, and so forth and so on.

COL, bullet weight, and bullet configuration, are all changes
that require recalculating the powder charge. With all of
the changes he made, he should have been looking for
published load data for THAT configuration.

Reloading is for people who THINK. Ya don't have to be a
rocket scientist, but you can't make a bunch of significant
changes to a load and expect that it will work the same way
it did before your alterations.

At least he didn't blame other folks for his mistakes.

-Stretch