A question for the gun experts
 

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.


--

Roger Shoaf

About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube, then
they come up with this striped stuff.

A question for the gun experts
 

About 1 inch past the forcing cone stuck in the barrel. This would be a job
for a wooden dowel and a hammer to beat it out. This assumes you recognized
the failure and looked before you chamber and fire another round. If the
second option were taken, serious injury would result from the exploding
gun.
Steve

"Roger Shoaf" wrote in message
...
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.


--

Roger Shoaf

About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube,
then
they come up with this striped stuff.

A question for the gun experts
 

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

Depending on if its standard or magnum primers, they usually travel
just far enough to lock up the cylinder. Magnum primers may get the
first bullet into the forcing cone.

None will exit the barrel.

Gunner

A question for the gun experts
 

As others have stated - won't leave the barrel. Given a lead bullet,
the distance will depend on the the diameter to which the bullet was
sized after casting/swaging. Larger bullets not as far, smaller
bullets only a small amount farther after the rifling begins engraving
the lead surface.
This is one of the error conditions that can occur during reloading,
particularly with light target loads.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

A question for the gun experts
 

"Roger Shoaf" wrote in message
...
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

(Shudder!)

In 'Nam, I had a "grease gun" leave one about two inches up from the bolt
during a fire fight. .45ACP isn't hot enough to break the gun, but the next
round's explosion at the breech was startling, to say the least.

LLoyd

A question for the gun experts
 

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, Roger Shoaf wrote:
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

Known as a "squib".

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

Right about into the forcing cone, probably then preventing the cylinder
from being opened or turned.

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

So...why do you ask? (push it back into the case with a brass rod and
gentle hammer taps and yes, the other pipes are pointed at you while you
do this.)

A question for the gun experts
 

In article , "Roger Shoaf" wrote:
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

Just read Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders", didja? (Though that was a 9mm
semi-auto IIRC).

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

A question for the gun experts
 

"Roger Shoaf" wrote:

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

Just far enough to tie up the cylinder. DAMHIKT!

Wes

A question for the gun experts
 

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it. The old rifle is worn enough that these
rounds work well in it. I did try one in a fairly new bolt action
rifle and the bullet didn't exit the barrel. It was about 2 inches
from the end and just fell out when pushed with an aluminum rod. I
know that if I tried shooting a regular bullet propelled by only the
primer it would get stuck. I imagine that a .357 would be even more
likely to get stuck.
ERS

A question for the gun experts
 

Are you referring to the "BB cap" round?

Eric R Snow wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it. The old rifle is worn enough that these
rounds work well in it. I did try one in a fairly new bolt action
rifle and the bullet didn't exit the barrel. It was about 2 inches
from the end and just fell out when pushed with an aluminum rod. I
know that if I tried shooting a regular bullet propelled by only the
primer it would get stuck. I imagine that a .357 would be even more
likely to get stuck.
ERS

A question for the gun experts
 

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They fired
a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a primer-only
charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size as a standard
..22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress

A question for the gun experts
 

Ed Huntress wrote:

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They fired
a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a primer-only
charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size as a standard
.22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I've got some of those. I pulled the ball on one to look at
the primer charge. Didn't do a side by side with a regular
..22 round, but my impression is there's a bit more primer.

Jon

A question for the gun experts
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:55:58 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They fired
a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a primer-only
charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size as a standard
.22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

The CCI CB short has 0.5 grains of powder, looks like W231 but who
knows. Specs say it has a 29 grain bullet but the one I weighed was
30.5 grains. My balance is accurate to +/- 0.1 grain. Specified m.v.
at 710 fps is a bit less than that of a good .22 pellet rifle but the
projectile has more mass. Muzzle energy at spec velocity and spec mass
is about 44 joules or 32 ft-lbf. A Beeman Crow-Magnum .22 pellet
weighs 18.5 grains, energy at 800 fps would be about 32 joule or 26
ft-lbf, ample to cleanly drop rabbits in milady's garden. (Dropped
another one last evening. Head shot, 25 yards. Back flip, then
still.)

The report from a CB short is a pop, a bit louder than an air rifle
but not nearly the crack of a .22LR with supersonic velocity.

Energy of the CB short is still 28 ft-lbf at 50 yards. I expect that
the Crow-Magnum pellet slows down considerably faster, be interesting
to check it with a chrony. It still has ample punch to cleanly
dispatch a rabbit at that range.

A question for the gun experts
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:45:05 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:

Are you referring to the "BB cap" round?

Eric R Snow wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it. The old rifle is worn enough that these
rounds work well in it. I did try one in a fairly new bolt action
rifle and the bullet didn't exit the barrel. It was about 2 inches
from the end and just fell out when pushed with an aluminum rod. I
know that if I tried shooting a regular bullet propelled by only the
primer it would get stuck. I imagine that a .357 would be even more
likely to get stuck.
ERS
Greetings Louis,
The rounds I'm talking about are neither the BB cap or CB short
rounds. I do shoot CB shorts from time to time but the rounds I'm
talking about are even slower and are made by Aguila. The box has
printed on the front of it "Super Colibri Sans Poudre". On the side it
has printed "no gunpowder". The bullet weighs 20 grains.
ERS

A question for the gun experts
 

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart to
find out!

Steve R.

A question for the gun experts
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.

A question for the gun experts
 

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:43:52 -0500, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.

I've never seen a BB cap round. Lots of CB shorts though. I think
they're kind of fun. Sometimes when I'm plinking I'll randomly load a
couple CB shorts into my old pump action .22 with the balance being
long rifle. Then I'll ask someone who is plinking with me if they
would like to try my old pump action. I tell 'em the rifle is already
loaded. It's so funny they get the expected report and slight kick
from the long rifle rounds and then one shot kinda goes pfft. I act
all innocent, and then after a couple more shots they get another
pfft. I get asked questions like what kind of crummy ammo am I buying.
I fess up but it sure is funny how quiet CB shorts and powder free
are.
ERS

A question for the gun experts
 

A buddy of mine had a 357 with the bullet stuck in between the cylinder and
the barrel. Took the gun to my old man.... He slapped a rag in his old vise,
put the gun in, barrel up and gently pounded the bullet back into the
casing.... I was scared s*^tless and was sure he was going to blow his hand
off... The buddy was happy and I thought Dad was fearless.....I remember it
like it was yesterday.... must have been at least 20 years ago...

bob in phx...
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, Roger Shoaf
wrote:
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

Known as a "squib".

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

Right about into the forcing cone, probably then preventing the cylinder
from being opened or turned.

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

So...why do you ask? (push it back into the case with a brass rod and
gentle hammer taps and yes, the other pipes are pointed at you while you
do this.)

A question for the gun experts
 

"Steve R." ***********@*************.*** wrote in message
news:5KPri.20970$rX4.502@pd7urf2no...

I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to find out!

Steve R.

They may have evolved over time. The last time I saw BB caps advertised was
around 1960. They were still round balls then. The ones my dad had, which he
must have bought around 1930, were round balls, too.

It appears that the former "CB cap" got re-named "CB short" somewhere along
the line, too.

--
Ed Huntress

A question for the gun experts
 

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Steve R." ***********@*************.*** wrote in message
news:5KPri.20970$rX4.502@pd7urf2no...

I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to find out!

Steve R.

They may have evolved over time. The last time I saw BB caps advertised
was around 1960. They were still round balls then. The ones my dad had,
which he must have bought around 1930, were round balls, too.

It appears that the former "CB cap" got re-named "CB short" somewhere
along the line, too.

--
Ed Huntress

That's because there is a "CB long" made by CCI and maybe others. It is a
long rifle case with a 29 gr. bullet loaded to the same velocity as the
regular CB cap. It was marketed to eliminate the problem of chamber fouling
caused by the short case preventing easy loading of long cases after a
session of firing regular CB caps (or CB shorts).

Randy

A question for the gun experts
 

"Randal O'Brian" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Steve R." ***********@*************.*** wrote in message
news:5KPri.20970$rX4.502@pd7urf2no...

I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to find out!

Steve R.

They may have evolved over time. The last time I saw BB caps advertised
was around 1960. They were still round balls then. The ones my dad had,
which he must have bought around 1930, were round balls, too.

It appears that the former "CB cap" got re-named "CB short" somewhere
along the line, too.

--
Ed Huntress

That's because there is a "CB long" made by CCI and maybe others. It is a
long rifle case with a 29 gr. bullet loaded to the same velocity as the
regular CB cap. It was marketed to eliminate the problem of chamber
fouling caused by the short case preventing easy loading of long cases
after a session of firing regular CB caps (or CB shorts).

Randy

Aha! Yes, that's quite a long jump in a gun chambered for L.R. That's
something like the low-power rounds I load for my Ruger .32 H&R Magnum. I
use round balls and Red Dot, and fill the space with kapok.

--
Ed Huntress

A question for the gun experts
 

According to Roger Shoaf :
Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

Hmm ... about 1" into the barrel. Certainly not out the far end
of it.

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard lead
round nose (no metal jacket.

It might make some difference, but not enough to get things out
the far end of the barrel.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

A question for the gun experts
 

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that
were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard
lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same
size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on
cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.

Sez BB Cap on the box!


Steve R.


--
Return address munged, to bugger up spammers!

A question for the gun experts
 

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that
were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard
lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same
size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on
cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.


Just found an empty box in a drawer. It must have been there since the 60s!
It has " C I L Superclean B. B. Caps" printed on the box.


Steve R.



--
Return address munged, to bugger up spammers!

A question for the gun experts
 

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:51:16 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that
were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard
lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same
size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on
cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.


Just found an empty box in a drawer. It must have been there since the 60s!
It has " C I L Superclean B. B. Caps" printed on the box.


Steve R.

Sounds like a BB cap to me!

A question for the gun experts
 

"Don Foreman" wrote

Sounds like a BB cap to me!

Ayup. Went to the local sporting goods store to get some BB caps, and no
one except the old guy who was older than I was knew what I was talking
about. He said they had a new name now. Shows how long it's been since I
bought any.

Steve

A question for the gun experts
 

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:51:16 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:38:41 GMT, "Steve R."
***********@*************.*** wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Eric R Snow" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:37:02 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"
wrote:

Assume one were to take a .357 revolver and load it with shells that
were
reloaded with a primer only and without any powder.

How far would the bullet get, only propelled by the primer charge?

If it makes a difference let's assume that the bullets are standard
lead
round nose (no metal jacket.
Greetings Roger,
I shoot .22 ammo that is primered only. No powder. It is for pistols
only and the bullet is much smaller than a .22 short bullet. I do
shoot these out of a pistol but also an 80 year old rifle that has
had
a lot of lead go through it.

The sounds like the "BB cap" round that was popular in the 1930s. They
fired a round ball (unlike the slightly larger "CB cap") and had a
primer-only charge. However, I don't know if the primer was the same
size
as a standard .22 round, or maybe had a bit more stuff.

I shoot primer-only .38 Spl. and .32 H&R Mag in my basement, but with
homemade wax bullets. They work fairly well. They're entertaining on
cold
winter nights, anyway.

--
Ed Huntress


I used to use BB caps a bit. May still have some. They had a normal .22
bullet in a short case, but very little powder. 'Cause I took some apart
to
find out!

Steve R.

Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.


Just found an empty box in a drawer. It must have been there since the
60s!
It has " C I L Superclean B. B. Caps" printed on the box.


Steve R.

Sounds like a BB cap to me!

In the following article, it is stated that the original BB caps were primer
only. The later CB or conical bullet had just a pinch of powder. (I'm sure
it was specifically measured, but in this article, it is referred to as a
"pinch.")

It is stated that the BB caps were DESIGNED for shooting gallery use.

All together, (I thought) an informative site for .22 bullet information.
Particularly when they get down to the Winchester Rimfire Magnum
development. Also info on the #12 shot "bird or rat shot" rounds.

Steve

A question for the gun experts
 

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 01:53:25 -0600, "SteveB"
wrote:



Having a normal bullet and a wee dab of powder sounds like a CB.


Just found an empty box in a drawer. It must have been there since the
60s!
It has " C I L Superclean B. B. Caps" printed on the box.


Steve R.

Sounds like a BB cap to me!

In the following article, it is stated that the original BB caps were primer
only. The later CB or conical bullet had just a pinch of powder. (I'm sure
it was specifically measured, but in this article, it is referred to as a
"pinch.")

It is stated that the BB caps were DESIGNED for shooting gallery use.

All together, (I thought) an informative site for .22 bullet information.
Particularly when they get down to the Winchester Rimfire Magnum
development. Also info on the #12 shot "bird or rat shot" rounds.

Steve

Following article?

A question for the gun experts
 

"SteveB" wrote

In the following article, it is stated that the original BB caps were
primer only.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/history_rimfire_ammo.htm

Guess it would be helpful to post the article, huh?