Hammer Bullets Pressure Testing Results

[Calvin45]

The simple fact is, without pressure testing equipment, you have ZERO DATA to show…I have a Pressure Trace II, have done since 2010/11 and it's not just Hammer bullets that show lesser start pressure, bore rider designs, shorter bearing surfaces and HBN coating all change the outcome, as does a cold or hot primer.
Until you have proof of what you tout, really your just peeing I the wind.

Cheers.

I've treated my 75 grain 257 hammers with hex boron nitride haha. Would that mean I need to find ways to get the pressure back up at this point? .

I appreciate you not flinching to say that a) this hammer phenomenon is real and demonstrable but also that b) it's not somehow unique to hammer bullets. As the saying goes, there's more than one way to skin a cat (my wife actually hadn't heard that saying before she married me, first time I said it she looks at me horrified like I'm a psycho and asks "why are you skinning cats!!!!????" )

Short bearing surface overall absolutely affects pressure. And even with no grooves or bore rider or any such thing, the relatively short surfaced 120 Barnes tac tx treated with hbn does about the same things that the 124 hammer hunter is touted to be capable of out when Barnes "aren't supposed to be able to".

BUT I will say unequivocally there does seem to be something to the hammer design (or maybe it's the copper alloy) that is MUCH more forgiving of ludicrously high RPMs - as in shorter lighter bullets being driven to warp speed in barrels twisted for much longer heavier pills - than has been true of any Barnes bullet

Edit: by "forgiving" I mean accuracy wise. Hammers are about the least sensitive to seating depth variation AND least susceptible to degradation of accuracy from "overstabilization" that I've ever seen. I know overstabilization is a contentious term, and I don't know how real or proven it is either but I do know that as a rule I've never seen all that good of accuracy from lighter or shorter bullets out of magnum cartridges with aggressive twists for said bullets requirements…hammers do play different there.

 

[MagnumManiac]

Yes, all of the things you mention which reduce friction and will logically increase velocity.

Im not sure a coating on a standard bullet will lower initial pressure measurably. It will certainly reduce friction once in the barrel. But, if you have some data, please share it. It would be interesting.

Primers are really bullet agnostic, because a hotter or less hot primer will have the same directional impact on a standard bullet, one that's coated, or a Hammer. It will provide more or less velocity in some measure to every bullet.

The fact is that velocity and pressure are not linear, as preached to everyone, I have proved this many times using the Pressure Trace II.
Primers aren't doing what you think they are doing, they change start pressure AND barrel time. Any time this is a gentle ignition from a compatible primer brisance, more velocity is achievable, which is why match primers MAY settle an erratic load, as does seating depth.
HBN coating dramatically changes pressure, regardless of bullet type as you say, it drops 10,000psi or more regularly. I started coating 2 brands before developing my own CNC turned bullets, Sierra and Nosler. With each, additional powder of 3-4 grains was required to get up to the uncharted bullets pressure and the start pressures were well below what was necessary for complete combustion, a faster powder was often required to get the start pressure at a happy place.

Since I sold my business, the graphs are no longer available to me, but I remember vividly all of my testing outcomes since I spent around 6 years developing the info on several calls and cartridges.

Cheers.

 

[MagnumManiac]

I've treated my 75 grain 257 hammers with hex boron nitride haha. Would that mean I need to find ways to get the pressure back up at this point?

Well you may very well need to, however the only way to know is to test comparatively between coated and uncounted over a chronograph.
I've treated many bullets now, but the one's I have found little benefit coating are Nosler Competition bullets in 224 cal, I feel their length is the issue, but it may be other factors. Little difference running the 77g CC in a 7" twist at around 3100fps with my 22-250AI. Coated or not.

Cheers.

 

[2buffalo]

Hodgdon have always IMPLIED that they MANUFACTURE powder and test it…they don't. I know where their data comes from, QL or other testing facilities like Sierra and Nosler, just to name 2.

Cheers.

This statement by Hodgdon is absolutely laughable!

You never answered my questions. You said their statement was laughable.

In the statement you replied to where did it say or was implied that they manufacture powder? They also said in their statement that their information comes from their own tests.

All Hodgdon reloading data is generated using industry standardized laboratory equipment and procedures. Over time, ammunition components and even testing procedures can change. As an example, bullet construction continues to evolve and even the most current data may not be applicable to a new bullet design. With the variations and combinations of calibers, powders and components we appreciate how hard it may be to find the exact reload information for a specific combination. For obsolete powders, calibers, and components this is even harder and no current reload data may exist.

 

[Calvin45]

Well you may very well need to, however the only way to know is to test comparatively between coated and uncounted over a chronograph.
I've treated many bullets now, but the one's I have found little benefit coating are Nosler Competition bullets in 224 cal, I feel their length is the issue, but it may be other factors. Little difference running the 77g CC in a 7" twist at around 3100fps with my 22-250AI. Coated or not.

Cheers.

I was being silly mostly haha, but I will say I crimp these loads pretty hard to ensure consistent ignition. In my .257 wby the use of non magnum primers in conjunction with a decently heavy crimp seems to produce very pleasing results. I don't know if hbn would matter much on a hammer as the bearing surface is so little to begin with but I did it mainly because the bore is treated with it and all my other loads use it so I stay consistent.

Haven't fired any untreated bullets over the chrono with that rifle. These treated 75ers are doing 4150 fps with single digit ES numbers and about as accurate as any other load (sub 1 inch, not a cloverleaf shooter but sub MOA which for me and what I intend for this particular rifle is certainly more than sufficient)

out of a 24 inch stainless vanguard

 

[Lou270]

The simple fact is, without pressure testing equipment, you have ZERO DATA to show…I have a Pressure Trace II, have done since 2010/11 and it's not just Hammer bullets that show lesser start pressure, bore rider designs, shorter bearing surfaces and HBN coating all change the outcome, as does a cold or hot primer.
Until you have proof of what you tout, really your just peeing in the wind.

Cheers.

Uh. What exactly am I touting and where did I say hammer or any other bullet design does not change start pressure?

Lou

 

[MagnumManiac]

They also said in their statement that their information comes from their own tests

This is the laughable part. They do not test anything, nothing!
They package and label powder made by others, rebrand it and sell it.
For example, ADI/Thales here in Australis developed and copied 2 unique WWII powders and made them for military contracts, being copies of the original H4350 and H4831 recipes but with additives for temp insensitive. Hodgdon were packaging and reselling surplus and salvaged H4350 and H4831 prior to ADI making the newer versions.
Those 2 powders were designated as ADI AR2209 and ADI AR2213 respectively. The full line up of ADI manufactured powders will astound you, I will include the Hodgdon designation.
AS30N (Clays)
AP50N (HP-38)
AS50N (International)
AP70N (Universal)
AP100 (not sold to Hodgdon)
AR2205 (H4227)
AR2207 (H4198)
BENCHMARK1 (not sold to Hodgdon)
AR2219 (H322)
BENCHMARK2 (BENCHMARK)
AR2206 (discontinued H335)
AR2206H (H4895)
AR2208 (VARGET)
AR2209 (H4350)
AR2213 (H4831)
AR2217 (H1000)
AR2225 (RETUMBO)
AR2218 (H50BMG)
AR2214 (discontinued powder between RETUMBO & H50BMG) Awesome powder in big magnums, but nobody outside of here bought it so they dropped it.
So, there you have an old list of powders that Hodgdon buy and rebrand. I haven't listed some of the newer powders like 8208 and the like because I don't have the info in front of me.

Cheers.

 

[Lou270]

This is the laughable part. They do not test anything, nothing!

Where is this info from? Hodgdon has a ballisitics lab and aquired an additional one when they bought Ramshot in Montana. Further they state that all loads are provided from pressure barrels except for wildcat cartridges where saami limits do not exist.

Lou

 

[2buffalo]

This is the laughable part. They do not test anything, nothing!
They package and label powder made by others, rebrand it and sell it.
For example, ADI/Thales here in Australis developed and copied 2 unique WWII powders and made them for military contracts, being copies of the original H4350 and H4831 recipes but with additives for temp insensitive. Hodgdon were packaging and reselling surplus and salvaged H4350 and H4831 prior to ADI making the newer versions.
Those 2 powders were designated as ADI AR2209 and ADI AR2213 respectively. The full line up of ADI manufactured powders will astound you, I will include the Hodgdon designation.
AS30N (Clays)
AP50N (HP-38)
AS50N (International)
AP70N (Universal)
AP100 (not sold to Hodgdon)
AR2205 (H4227)
AR2207 (H4198)
BENCHMARK1 (not sold to Hodgdon)
AR2219 (H322)
BENCHMARK2 (BENCHMARK)
AR2206 (discontinued H335)
AR2206H (H4895)
AR2208 (VARGET)
AR2209 (H4350)
AR2213 (H4831)
AR2217 (H1000)
AR2225 (RETUMBO)
AR2218 (H50BMG)
AR2214 (discontinued powder between RETUMBO & H50BMG) Awesome powder in big magnums, but nobody outside of here bought it so they dropped it.
So, there you have an old list of powders that Hodgdon buy and rebrand. I haven't listed some of the newer powders like 8208 and the like because I don't have the info in front of me.

Cheers.

So it's their buisness model that upsets you? It apparently doesn't upset ADI/Thales or they wouldn't be selling Hogdon powder and allowing them to rebrand it. This happens all over the world with many different products. It's nothing new.

 

[jessej]

isn't as simple as
the frictional pressure normally lost and converted to heat with normal bullets is just less, so if you had even equal initial pressure, and less friction, velocity would end up being more because friction is less?

Physics is physics is physics.

And math don't lie.



Unless it's this new common core crap. It lies every time.