Author Topic: 454 CASULL NIGHTMARE!!! (Read 1279 times)

DANGEROUS DAVE · « **on:** March 04, 2004, 12:54:00 PM »

HELLO AND GOOD DAY TO ALL. I HAVE A ENCORE IN 454 AND AM HAVING PROBLEMS KEEPING THE SCOPE ON! I HAVE A REDFIELD 3 RING SCOPE MOUNT AND A TC 2-7 PWR RECOIL PROOF SCOPE. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL PROBLEMS KEEPING THE SCOPE STILL. THE LAST PROBLEM WAS THREE OF THE FOUR SCREWS SNAPPED OFF THE MOUNT. THE LOAD I WAS SHOOTING WAS 260 GR. SPEER, AND 36 GR. OF H110. THE RECOIL IS STIFF, BUT THE SPEER MANUAL SAYS THE MAX IS 37 GR. THERE ARE NO OTHER SIGNS OF TOO MUCH PRESSURE.

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SCREWS WERE FAULTY(I GOT THEM FROM A FRIEND). THE LENGTH WAS RIGHT AND THEY WERE TIGHT.

IS THIS TOO MUCH FOR THE TC??

rickyp · « **Reply #1 on:** March 04, 2004, 03:13:27 PM »

my hornady 4 th edition listing for the 454 is:
H110- 250 gr bullet and 33.9 grs as a maximum load
you may be push it to hard, and if you got the rings from a Friend they may not be the right screws or could have been stressed before you got it.

something to remember when loading for a closed breach handgun instead of a wheel gun. The closed breach allows for a higher pressure with a lower charge. the wheel gun lets pressure escape out of the cylinder gap.

Jim Stacy · « **Reply #2 on:** March 05, 2004, 02:39:03 AM »

I had an octgon 10" 44/357 B&D hit me in the head witha scope and base when it sheared off the screws, and yes it did leave a mark!! Sometimes hard recoiling handguns just don't seem to tolerate a scope being on them . I have shot contenders since 1968 and keeping th scope in place has always been a problem with even much smaller calibers . My 357 Herrett will loosen a scope and base but I just check regurarly . I clean the top of the barrel degrease , trim the screws so thye don't bottom out before the base is tight and then epoxy the works together and usually it all stays together . I could imagine how the 454 would be much more challenging because of a lot more recoil. Good luck try the above . You also may want to get the other two holes put in your barrel to make a 6 screw mount but be careful who does the work so they dont drill your holes too deep.

MePlat · « **Reply #3 on:** March 05, 2004, 09:34:39 AM »

To readily solve your problems send it to SSK and have a T-Sob base and rings installed. It will stay put.

Selmer · « **Reply #4 on:** March 09, 2004, 01:45:16 PM »

I also have a .454 Casull for my Encore with the 3-ring Redfield mounts and rings, with a 4x Leupold mounted in them. I have the screws secured anchored with Loc-tite, and I've had no problems over the last year of shooting, although I haven't been going for high-velocity with the light bullets, I've been sticking to 300+ gr. weights when searching for the heavy loads that shoot well. I stick with Unique for the 250 gr. for plinkers, 320 gr. at 1500 smacks a bit harder than any 25o gr. bullet will, and it will penetrate more and retain more energy downrange. I suggest you get a hold of some heavier cast bullets and give them a try, the recoil is a bigger push rather than the wrist-cracking snap of fast, light bullets.
Selmer

Captainkev · « **Reply #5 on:** March 10, 2004, 01:27:01 PM »

I am shooting a 376 Styer on my Encore. I got it from SSK with the T'SOB mount. I also used Loctight on my rings as I do with all my scope mounts. I have had no problem with screws loosening or point of aim changing at all.

Kevin

ark_fireman · « **Reply #6 on:** March 19, 2004, 07:21:23 AM »

I have the same base and rings on my 44 mag SBH, never had a problem. But on the 454, I can see where that is a different story! My SRH 454 was having "scope slippage" w/factory ruger rings. It took some neoprene inserts to get the scope to stay put. As far as your problem, i'm with Meplat in recommending a T'SOB 6 screw base. SSK will put one on your gun for $88 plus $12 return shipping.

savageshooter · « **Reply #7 on:** March 24, 2004, 04:15:29 AM »

It could be that your base isn't fitting the barrel snug. Usually screws break from movement of the base and or stretching of the screws. So you're more likely to break a screw if the screw isn't tight enough to keep the base from shifting. I usually degrease the barrel and base and put a little loctite under the base as well as on the screws, a dab of epoxy would work fine too. This will give the base enough friction to keep it from shifting. Also make sure the screw heads are the correct fit for the base, good and snug. To keep the rings from slipping I use powdered rosin inside the rings. You can get it in a cloth bag for weightlifting, gymnastics, etc. You're on the right track with three rings. I use Weigand magnums. Happy shooting!

Lone Star · « **Reply #8 on:** March 24, 2004, 02:52:21 PM »

Quote

something to remember when loading for a closed breach handgun instead of a wheel gun. The closed breach allows for a higher pressure with a lower charge. the wheel gun lets pressure escape out of the cylinder gap.

While this is commonly repeated as fact, it is completely inaccurate. Speer learned the truth in 1974 when Dave Andrews published the report of his work for Speer in Gun Digest.

Using piezometric instruments, Speer discoverd that instead of lower pressures in a revolver - which is what they expected to find - the revolver had much higher pressuers than anyone expected. The reason should be obvious but it took science to prove it. Like a rifle, the maximum pressures are developed very soon after the bullet leaves the case. In the revolver, when the bullet leaves the case it upsets when it hits the forcing cone, slowing down its acceleration just at the point that the chamber pressure peaks. The result is that when the pressure is at its highest, the barel/cylinder gap is filled with the bullet and no gas can escape.

Speer found that while changing seating depths and bullet designs could reduce the peak pressures, it still occurred when there was no cylinder gap. Once the bullet base passes the gap the pressure was already dropping. Food for thought, and yet another old wive's tale disproved with science.

T/C nimrod · « **Reply #9 on:** March 25, 2004, 04:30:40 AM »

lonestar - that's interesting reading about Speer's findings. Last year I was doing load development for a 14" 41 mag using Hornady's published data. This data was compiled using a revolver - as stated in their data sheets. I experienced very high pressure signs about middle charge weights. (1900 fps with a 210 grn. HP).

Being of the curious nature, I contacted Hornady about my situation. They explained pressure curves as related to revolvers and closed breech guns - saying that pressure is relieved faster in a revolver then a closed breech gun (Contender). Then, still yearning for more information, a call was placed to Gary Reeder custom guns. All I wanted to do was find out if any testing was done with 210 grain bullets in his 41GNR line, and what velocities they may have seen. I explained the reasons for my question to the gentleman that picked up the phone, and he spent the better part of an hour explaining pressure relationships in revolvers vs. closed breech guns. I've probably forgotten some of the technical information the guy shared with me, but IMHO Speer has only touched the surface of this relationship with their testing. (Before I hung up, I found out I was talking to Mr. Reeder himself - truly a top shelf individual.)

We have to remember that there are quite a few variables that apply to pressure curves. Just wanted to share an experience where revolver loads gave much higher pressures in a closed breech gun. Thanks.

Lone Star · « **Reply #10 on:** March 25, 2004, 03:18:34 PM »

Thanks for the imput T/C N. Now that most bullet makers have piezometric pressure instruments, I'm sure that they have a lot more data on the relationships between closed breech firearms and revolvers....or do they? Have any of them actually built a custom revolver cylinder with the transponder to test actual revolver time/pressuer curves? I wonder....

Speer is the only company to publish this type of data, so we have to rely on it. Realize that the testing I spoke of was done 30 years ago - they certainly have more than "scratched the surface" by now. Just wish that they'd stop tight-holing us!

I can't comment much on your high pressure experience, but I do know that I've used a number of "revolver data" max loads in my various Contenders and haven't seen high pressures. This includes the .357, .45LC and .44 Mag, but not the .41. IME the reasons for large anomalies like that you reported are usually due to ganging of tolerences - a particularly fast lot of powder, larger/softer bullets, deeper bullet seating, smaller capacity cases, tight bore, wider rifling lands, hotter primer - all of which by themselves do make small increases in pressure. Add them all together and you could see an abnormal result.

I won't criticize the over-the-phone information you received - it was most probably very accurate and valuable. However, from my own experiences with bullet makers and their phone-techs, you can get some pretty bad information too. I once called one maker ( who shall remain nameless ) and got a rather odd answer to my ballistics question. I called them again three weeks later and asked the same thing, talked to a different tech, and got an answer completely opposite of what the first tech had told me. It does depend on who you talk to.....

T/C nimrod · « **Reply #11 on:** March 26, 2004, 03:38:54 AM »

LOL - I know what you mean by today's tech help. Fortunately I have to deal with technical issues at my day job, and have mastered using the right questions to get good answers. My rolodex is filled with not only companies, but also specific contacts who I feel have half a clue as to what they're talking about. (It's pretty sad that one has to know a product better then a manufacturer to get problems solved)

The .41 mag project (2003) was quite a learning experience for me. This was the first barrel that didn't agree with published load data (for me). Turned out to be another <moa shooter for me though.