Fillers

[TheDoubleD]

...what Richard is saying is they burn on his range and make grass fires. Small grass fires, and we always got them put out before they burned much.

Cotton being the biggest culprit...

[Patrick Chadwick]

Gentlemen, I am trying to understand this filler/wad business. I do not shoot an M-H (yet!) but do shoot 45-70, 43 Egyptian, and 11.15x60R, so I am not utterly clueless about BP cartridges.

If what I write irritates somebody, please have patience with my ignorance and try to explain where my thinking is going wrong - and at the moment it is going like this:

If you use a filler (by which I understand some soft or fluffy material that is too compressible to be regarded as a wad), then at the moment of firing the filler will not effectively restrict the gas expansion but will be heavily compressed. In other words, the powder will burn pretty much as if there was a volume of air in the case equal to the volume of uncompressed filler minus the compressed volume of the filler. With "fluffy" fillers this could be quite a lot. So it does not surprise me that there are concerns about ringing.

If you use a wad (by which I mean a material that cannot be compressed down to a few percent of its original volume) then this hidden air volume does not apply, or at least only slightly (you see, it's not plain black and white air/no air).

On the reasonable principle that the wheel has already been invented, I looked at the List of Changes, British War Material, Volumes I and II, to see how the original M-H cartridges were assembled.

LoC 2661 shows the famous first-generation foil cartridge, which contains 85 gn of powder, glazed board disc, a beesway wad with a concave depression on top, two more discs, and then the bullet. Apart from the concave depression in the wax wad, this is still basically a good way to make a BPCR load.

LoC 4756 (specifically for Egypt) shows the later solid drawn brass version. The powder charge is still 85 gn, but there is a "wad of cotton wool", approx. 1/10 inch thick, between the powder and the wax. Note the word "wad", implying that it was NOT loose filling. Presumably it was intended to take up the space that had now become available as a result of the altered base/cup, so that the powder charge could be held at 85 gn.

Skipping LoC 4868, the buckshot version, which had a filling of bone dust (where do you get that these days?) between the balls, we come to LoC 4911. The charge is 85 gn, as ever, but the base/cup is now thicker, apparently eliminating the need for a wad, as the assembly is now the same as the first (foil) version, including the depression in the wax wad.

Finally, we come to LoC 5159. This is a version with a reduced (63-67 gn) charge for the M-H carbines. The case volume is reduced by a paper lining within the main body of the case. A filler is NOT used. The "Egyptian" solution has been dropped. As dumping in a few grains of filler would seem simpler than applying a paper lining, why was the simpler and cheaper option not used?

The answer, I suspect, is that it was already known that a filler was not a good solution. It is easy to forget (see Skennerton's book if you have) that the Martini-Henry was introduced after an extremely rigorous selection and approval procedure, and just about any idea that anyone comes up with concerning black powder shooting was already known, tried, and maybe discarded with good reason in the 19th century.

So, dear M-H fans, why are you playing about with "fluffy" fillers at all?
OK, don't all jump on me at the same time, please form an orderly queue. I know that the original service load was a real shoulder-basher. I know you want to reduce the charge so that you can fire a competition target without requiring medical treatment afterwards. And I am not expecting anyone to fiddle paper linings into the case ( it was probably inserted in the factory before the cartridge was necked down, something we can hardly duplicate).

But why not use a felt wad, such as the wads used by the percussion revolver shooters? I know it can't "flow" around the shoulder, but I do not think this is necessary. The wad can be inserted part way, the case inverted, and then the wad pushed in futher, so that the powder is sitting round the powder in the neck - no substantial air space.

And this brings me to the previously unexplained depression on the top of the wax wad in all the M-H cartridges mentioned above. I suspect that, because powder can very a bit in density, that this was provided so that the bullet could be seated to a constant depth without any significant powder compression, as the wax would deform to fit. If anyone has a better explanation, let's have it!

Patrick

[Richardwv]

First if you break down one of the drawn brass LOC cartridges you will find loose fiber fairly densely packed. Call it a wad, call it filler, but it is about 3 grains as specified by Double D. As you say, they pretty much knew what was what by the time they adopted the drawn case. However it is worth noting that during the MH frontline service the foil cartridge remained that standard as it was produced well into the 20th Century.

What is being prevented is not the expansion of the charge upon ignition, but holding it in place until ignition and prevention of a "coal dust" effect, while also ensuring there is no obstruction at the neck. The more solid the mass, the more likely an obstruction will occur. Keep in mind that the filler that was used in part resulted from the change from the foil to the semi-ballonhead drawn case, which had a much larger capacity....very similar to the reformed CBC brass used by many. This same problem was also addressed by using a paper liner, which reduced capacity....but is problematic for reloaders. The solidhead brass sold today is less in capacity so the filler is that much less of an issue and a number of folks shoot the rounds with the airspace to no ill effect.

One major consideration when comparing BP cartridge technique is that the MH round is a much more severe bottleneck than others of the era, so much of common practice has to be reconsidered. Since I primarily use reformed CBC brass, I prefer to load to the MK I drawn brass standard as shown below:

[TheDoubleD]

Patrick,

The issue we run into is that the LoC charge of 85 grains in modern solid head cases doesn't fill the case to the neck. In fact it just comes to the bottom of the shoulder in the solid head cases. It takes 95 grains of Fg to fill to the bottom of the neck in the solid head cases.

In the CBC semi balloon head cases it takes a 109 grains of powder to reach the neck. 85 grains in these cases are way below the shoulder.

We can only load card wads and wax wads to the bottom of the neck, this leaves a large airspace between neck wad and powder chamber. One school of thought is you shouldn't have air space in black powder cartridges.

Cards and wax wads work just fine in the neck, what do you use in the body of the case below the neck?

The one LoC load you mentioned had a cotton wool wad. I have pulled some of these LoC loads down and none of the cotton wads were 1/10 in thick, all were thicker, closer to 1/4 inch thick and compressed. One thing I noticed with the loads I pulled downs was that beeswax wad was often melted and had soaked into the cotton. Those loads had to get very hot to do that. The cotton was put in the case to prevent the melted bees wax from contaminating the powder in the hot Saharan sun. Greener mentions this in one of his books.

The paper liner was not put in to reduce the case capacity. The literature is very clear on that. The paper liner was to prevent corrosive action between the brass case and the powder. All the paper liners I have seen are tissue paper and do not serve as filler.

In order to address the airspace issue in modern case we turn to filler.

We can't use hard cards or below the neck because the powder chamber is larger than the neck. The only thing we can use is fiber and foam fillers. There is ample evidence that in the literature that filler were used in commercial ammunition. Eley and Kynoch used them extensively during the transition from Blackpowder Express to Nitro powders. Modern day Kynoch uses foam as a filler in their commercially marked ammunition.

Now to address your one comment regarding “fluffy” fillers. We aren’t using a little fluffy tuft of kapok to hold powder in place such as target shooter do with there light loads. We are using the fiber filler to fill air space. We are compressing as much filler as we can get in the case to fill the airspace over the powder.

Bottom, line we aren’t trying to duplicate LoC loads. We are trying to improve on that and we are quite successful at it.

[Patrick Chadwick]

I agree with you: no fluffy fillers, no ringing problem. Am I right?

Wads as per LoC 4756: I estimated the 1/10" from the drawing. You say it was more like 1/4" and compressed. So I reckon it must also have been inserted before the cartridge was necked.

The felt wad I was suggesting would be the kind used by revolver shooters, which are 10 mm long. My idea (which I apparently did not make properly clear) was that this cylindrical felt wad could project into the neck region to take up the "spare" volume in the case. It may sound a bit wierd to reverse the cartridge to push the wad to its final depth, but this would be advisable so that the powder settles round the wad in the neck, and if it was a regular solution you would simply have a peg of appropriate length to set the depth.

As to LoC 5159, which, do not forget, was for the reduced charge for carbines, I quote:
"The case ... is similar to the Mark II solid case ...LoC 4911 and 4985 but, when filled, it has a thicker paper lining"
I.e. initial reason for lining doubtless as you say, but made thicker for the reduced charge. Please look at the drawing - that is no tissue paper.

Anyway, not having an M-H to play with, I was hoping that someone would be curious enough to try my suggestion out. Even though, if you are successfully using "non-fluffy" fillers, the idea may be redundant!

Patrick

[jamie5070]

I was curious about other fillers. I am currently shooting a mkIV using jamison brass, 85 gr with enough cow/1F to fill to the bass of the neck. That is followed by lube cookie between two card wads. For an experiment, I have made up some cartridges with a couple raps of nitrated paper inserted first. I wrapped it around a pencil and inserted it in the case. It unwound by itself once it was pushed all the way in. This has reduced the capacity to about 75 gr which is to the bottom of the neck. I hope to get out in the next couple of weeks and try them.
john

[TheDoubleD]

Patrick,

Correct, no fluffy filling, no ringing. Our fillers go below the neck over the powder down in the powder chamber.

No, I don't believe the cotton wool was put in the the case and then it was necked. It's very simple matter to put a cotton ball or piece of dacron or kapok in the Martini case by pushing it down with a wooden dowel.

Felt wads, stacks of card wads, grease cookies all work good in the neck itself. I have used all and they all work.

I have not pulled, or found any of the carbine rounds. so I can not offer any first hand knowledge on them.

I know some have tried various tubing, paper, and even copper tubing with less than satisfactory results. Just thinking about them worries me. And some of my worries have been founded by shooting results reported by others. The copper tubing was put in the 24 guage CBC shotgun case before the case was necked and formed to make the 45 cal. neck.

One of fellows on British militaria reported using copper tubing and after shooting finding the tubing sticking out of the neck of case.

You need a substantial amount of paper to reduce the powder space. The worry with this paper and cardboard tubing is where do they go when the cartridge is fired. Do they stay in the case, go down range or get stuck in the bore. You must check the case every shot and see if the wad is still there. You cannot miss a case...that might be the on that the paper or cardboard stays in the bore.

In the CBC shot gun case you could use water glas and put in a shotgun head wad. This is a standard practice in the old days. The hardest part of this is finding 24 guage head wads to fit the CBC case.

John, mentions using 50/50 Cream of Wheat and BP. I have used this technique. It works. I used it with Triple 7 as well as black powder. The use with Cow or any filler with Triple 7 is strongly not recommended.

When used with 2F Goex the CoW worked just fine. With any other grade of of black powder and 2Fg Swiss, when poured in the case the CoW and BP separated out from each other. This is not conducive to consistancy and was visable on the target.

Others have tried the nitrated paper with good results. But the reports were that the limited amount of reduction wasn't worth the effort.

Let me know by PM if you want to try kapok, I have a substantial amount.

[Patrick Chadwick]

Oh dear, now you've got my brain on full ahead invent. I have never seen a a shotgun head wad, but I believe I have a bagfull of felt wads that would do very nicely in an M-H case. White felt, 15 mm outer diameter, hole in the middle about 7 mm diameter. So the annulus is about 4 mm thick. Thickness of wad 5 mm. What is it? - The felt wad that is used under the guide pin on piano keys to dampen the impact on the keyboard frame, that's what. So nowall you need is a supply of scrap pianos...

Seriously, I reckon such a felt ring is spot on as a head wad.

Just one thought - what happens to a head wad when the gun is fired - does it burn, smoulder or what? What does that mean in terms of re-using cases? I presume that anyone who is not a multi-millionare IS re-using their M-H cases.

Patrick

[Patrick Chadwick]

Still not found an M-H that is isn't a Khyber Pass Special, a wreck, or both.
BUT ... how about an 1870s Peabody, Connecticut, rebarreled to 45-70? Surely a reloader-friendly solution ... but how do they shoot? Anyone know?

Patrick

[TheDoubleD]

Have you ever look in side a fired shotgun shell, down in the bottom is head wad. Some of the modern plastic shells have of course a plastic head, but some have a hard fiber wad. The old paper shells all had fiber head wads.

I don't think felt would work that well and is likely to catch fire as a head wad.

I don't work with metric cases so can't tell you if you wads are the right size or not.

Quite frankly, I don't know anyone using a head wads for the Martini. Maybe someone is, but I don't who. Fillers are so much easier to use.

The head wad has to be put in be for the neck is put in the Martini case. It is glued in with a product called waterglass.

Wads and filler are not comsumed when fired. They are blown out the barrel and down range. That is why you find card wads, tufts of fiber fillers, plastic shot cups, pieces of paper patch, etc, laying around the range after a days shooting. This includes the famous 50/50 Cow BP mix. the CoW is not consumed by the firing.

The only time I have experienced burning of fillers and wads is after they are blown out of the barrel and laying on the ground and only on hot dry days. See the reference up thread to setting Richards range on fire.

I have seen kapok, cotton and felt smoulder after it hits the ground.

If the Peabody is already rebarreled go for it.