It's not a matter of careful, it's a matter of insistently stubborn.  There is a portion of the reloading fraternity that doesn't believe in detonation, chamber ringing, etc.   

The Quigley rule was put in place after some people stubbornly refused to change their overpowder wad with 5744 load procedure, because "I've been doing it and it works, the other people that blow up their guns must be doing something stupid".  The Ballard shown above, the couple involved had been repeatedly cautioned that their load wasn't suitable for that rifle, and maybe not for any, and they replied that they had been doing it for years.   

We see it here, where people repeatedly want to make Stevens 44's into higher pressure centerfires, where they want to put centerfires on #4 rolling blocks, where they want to put .223's on a rolling block action, where they want to use cast ballards where a forged one is needed.   

It really boils down to being cheap.  Trying to save a few dollars by using less expensive actions or less expensive powders, at the expense of a safety risk.   

The club that runs the Quigley shoot decided to proactively act to not let individuals being cheap put others around them at risk, and expose the club to liability in case of an accident.

A couple pertained threads about 5744
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links) 

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Question to the forum, are there any factual incidents of barrel ringing using 5744 with wads on the powder in the following brands of rifles; C Sharp, Shiloh or Browning?

Premod70 wrote on May 13^th, 2024 at 7:46pm:

Fwiw, chamber ringing or detonation isn't brand-related. What's more,  it's something known since the end of the 19th century which some of us conveniently choose to ignore.

38-72 wrote on May 15^th, 2024 at 2:05am:

LOL, but it wasn't all hardship they did have canned Peaches (However the cans were soldered with lead)

MartiniBelgian wrote on May 15^th, 2024 at 1:41am:

No, it is somewhat brand/make related, jmho. All the before mentioned brands I named are not known for barrels that ring. There’s a big difference between the barrels of the black powder period and those made to withstand high pressure smokeless powders. All the brands I mentioned have barrels made for high pressures. There are plenty more but the ones found at the Quigley are usually of the three mentioned. A rule I use for loading smokeless powder loads with a wad is to stay under 20,000 psi and fire those loads in barrels made to withstand 60,000 psi on a regular basis. The French scientist, Vieille, stated that a wad over the powder would increase the pressures at the base of the bullet/projectile by two to three times. Using that figure tells me I’m reasonably safe as long as I stay below the quoted figure. Now, I know there are various ways to defeat any steel but so far I have loaded and fired over 4000 rounds using 5744 and a overpowder wad with no failure or sign there of but do not do this with antiques or low pressure barrels such as the Italian replicas; modern high pressure barrels only. Another plus in using a wad is every round I load is measured to a constant level assuring no double charges.