In the discussion of the burst low number 1903 receiver, there were multiple references made to problems or accidents with 5744 powder.  I know that 5744 is supposed to leave a lot of residue at low pressures, but have there been accidents?

calledflyer wrote on Jun 11^th, 2016 at 2:17pm:


I whole heartedly agree with CF. I would hope that the powder manufator would look into this.

As I remember, one of the SS's was a relined, cast Ballard in 45/? but, I think the other was a high wall. The Ballard, you could make a case for failure but, not the HW.

My issue with 03's has always been the unsupported case head and the reason that I haven't felt the need to own one.

I also have Hatcher's book and have read about the failures but, like many others, I felt they would be ok with cast bullet loads. The 28 gr load or 5744 was a lot higher than I would have used in a cast '06 load though.

Frank

Bent_Ramrod I agree there are way to many who jump to conclusions and seem to be experts not knowing all the real facts. Any powder that is now available will blow up a rifle if not used properly so should we rid of them all? If one does know what he has and it's limitations they shouldn't be using it and it has nothing to do with the manufacure looking into. If anyone here thinks they obtain more knowledge than the manufacture's team of experts they are simply a fool as they aren't producing Bubble Gum but explosives and its thier ass is on the line and not the arm chair expert who feels his knowledge is superior than thiers.

JLouis

Most of what I've heard involved 5744, and the fact it is a double base powder. A good number mention using wads with 5744 also, which seems to create some very bad pressure spikes if the wad gets out of place. 
I've never used it, and doubt I'll start with what I've read. They banned it or other double base powders at Quigley.

I've gone through a couple pounds of 5744, it meters better than 4759, but I thought that the barrel heated up rather quickly also. We'll see how long 8 pounds of 4759 will last.

Using wadding or filler with 5744 is a dangerous Idea the manufacturer warns against it. The powder when held back with a wad, filler or both develops dangerous pressures. it is a pretty good powder in large cases when used loose. it's one drawback is that is shoots dirty.

40 Rod

shot a lot of it in my sporter-weight Miroku 45-70' fairly heavy loads with 500 gr cast bullets.  no problems other than aching shoulders.   it burned a bit dirty, especially with breech-seated bullets, with fixed ammo not so much.  still have maybe 5 or 7 lbs of it, and no qualms about using it again in my big bore cases.

If I'm correct it was a mil-surp high-volume relatively low energy/density propellent originally designed for 50 BMG, large case, heavy jacketed bullets---at full auto.  not sure why one would choose it for '06/'03 cased ammo.

I have never seen a recommendation to use fillers etc. with AA5744 - which is precisely why I prefer to use it. I have also heard nothing about gymnastics like pointing the rifle skyward prior to shooting with it, so I do not do that either.

It sounds to me like a few shooters decided to treat 5744 like they have done with other powders popular for reduced loads, and promptly created a pressure spike for themselves by doing so.

Accurate Arms and Speer, my sources for AA5744 loads, do not say anything about using fillers.

It all comes down to reading and following specific directions from reliable sources, to the letter. - Nothing added or omitted. By following this rule, I have managed so far to stay out of trouble.

So, some shooters made a mistake... I hope nobody got hurt. The only really irreplaceable part of any firearm - is the nut behind the trigger.

Reduced loads in my Miroku 1885 in 270 WSM (130 grain bullet reduced loads listed in the Speer manual) produced five-shot groups at 100 yards as small as .317". - That is accurate enough for me!

I never noticed a barrel heating problem, but then again I tended to wait a minute or two between shots.