Discard barrel after squibb load

Status
Not open for further replies.
James K said:
Shooting out a stuck bullet is perfectly feasible BUT USING ABOUT A HALF CHARGE OF POWDER AND NO BULLET. And do NOT try it with a factory blank cartridge!

The reason the barrel bulges when a bullet is fired into the stuck bullet is that when the second bullet stops, its kinetic energy is dumped as heat. The heat rise occurs so fast and dissipates so fast that there is little outward sign, but it is enough to soften the barrel steel so the pressure creates a bulge. That heat can compromise the barrel steel in that spot.

Jim
Click to expand...
Not an engineer, but that doesn't quite sound right to me.

If the half-power charge is not enough to clear the squib, and the bullet never exits the barrel, the pressure inside the chamber still sounds dangerous to me. Depending on where the bullet got stuck, the chamber pressure will also be lower due to the greater space - possibly too low to clear the squib, and still higher than the frame can handle, even at half power.
 
Looking at it another way, any pressure remaining in the barrel in the instant after a squib bullet lodges in the barrel will be vented by the action. In fact, most squibs have insufficient pressure to work the action fully, so there certainly won't be enough pressure to harm the barrel. In revolvers, the cylinder gap would similarly vent the pressure.

The damage from squibs occurs when people don't recognize them and continue firing in every instance I am aware of.

On the one and only occasion when I had a squib (and it was of my own making) the bullet came out of the barrel with a hardwood dowel and a couple of taps from a rubber mallet. I am not sure I would try shooting it out with a powder charge, but if it seems that it has worked for some, so I won't quibble with success.
 
IndependentGeorge said:
If the half-power charge is not enough to clear the squib, and the bullet never exits the barrel, the pressure inside the chamber still sounds dangerous to me. Depending on where the bullet got stuck, the chamber pressure will also be lower due to the greater space - possibly too low to clear the squib, and still higher than the frame can handle, even at half power.
Click to expand...

If a half-powered load that leaves a bullet lodged in the barrel could cause damage, why wouldn't a full-power round that travels just as far as the squib load, but which is powered by more explosive force (a full, rather than half-powered load), also cause the same damage when it reaches that same point in the barrel?

You may have meant to say something other than "frame" when you wrote the comment above, but the FRAME isn't really affected by pressure. Put simply, the frame is primarily an on/of switch that provides a base upon which the slide can operate.

The barrel is designed to withstand more pressure than the ammo it shoots, and the ammo itself is typically loaded to strict standards. The barrel is the only thing directly affected by pressure and it includes two safety valves: 1) the bullet will eventually leave the barrel and the pressure will drop, and 2) the barrel itself (powered to the rear by the equal but opposite force of the explosion) will quickly unlock from the slide. When it unlock, the casing is free to move to the rear and another "window" is opened to lower pressure. Some guns, like the flip-up barrreled Berettas, use that pressure as the gun's extractor!

If there's not enough pressure from the powder explosion to cause 1) or 2), there's arguably not enough pressure to cause damage to the barrel. Massive overloads could certainly cause damage, but we're talking about squib loads, and NOT hyper-powered rounds inappropriate for the gun.

The real danger with a squib event is not realizing that it has occurred, and taking a second shot with a bullet in the barrel. Pressure can then be a problem -- but there's no guarantee that the frame will be affected. With massive overloads, the frame can be affected by shrapnel.
 
Last edited:
"...its kinetic energy is dumped as heat..." Nope. It's dumped as kinetic energy. The first bullet gets bashed by the second and expands outwards before being pushed further. No heat is generated. No way for heat to be generated. As mentioned, a stopped bullet has no energy, of any kind.
"...enough to soften the barrel steel..." Don't be daft. It takes 430F to turn steel pale yellow. 1400 degrees and 1500 degrees F to anneal high carbon steel.
"...Shooting out a stuck bullet is perfectly feasible..." And will cause damage.
That instructor come with any real credentials?
 
I can see what the person is thinking: that once the bullet is stationary it essentially acts as a plug to the roiling masses of hot gases behind the bullet and that they'll only have one way to go: through the barrel wall.

I think we need to consider which action requires less energy: pushing a bullet down a tight barrel or fracturing the metal walls of a treated barrel.

I think we know the answer as I can, with a dowel, pressure from my musculo-skeletal system and some choice metaphoric language, push a bullet down the length of a barrel. With those same facilities I cannot fracture a barrel wall.

Force will always take the path of least resistance and that is via the bullet's rear-end.
 
"...its kinetic energy is dumped as heat..." Nope. It's dumped as kinetic energy. The first bullet gets bashed by the second and expands outwards before being pushed further. No heat is generated. No way for heat to be generated. As mentioned, a stopped bullet has no energy, of any kind.
"...enough to soften the barrel steel..." Don't be daft. It takes 430F to turn steel pale yellow. 1400 degrees and 1500 degrees F to anneal high carbon steel.
"...Shooting out a stuck bullet is perfectly feasible..." And will cause damage.
That instructor come with any real credentials?
Click to expand...

Are you getting the original post mixed up with posters?
The instructor did not say any of the above.

Perhaps the instructor might have been wrong about a squibb causing damage, but one mistake does not make anyone totally wrong.
Maybe he's just being safe than sorry, but I wanted to know the facts.

For myself, I take everyone's statements with a grain of salt, from the instructor to the posters.
 
HighValleyRanch said:
Perhaps the instructor might have been wrong about a squibb causing damage, but one mistake does not make anyone totally wrong.

Maybe he's just being safe than sorry, but I wanted to know the facts.



For myself, I take everyone's statements with a grain of salt, from the instructor to the posters.
Click to expand...


Being safe than sorry and not understanding how bullets work (or at least explaining it in such a way as to imply that person doesn't know) are two different things. If you doubt any of the corrections mentioned in regards to the instructor take a general physics class. Scientific fact is a lot different than personal opinion.
 
If the ONLY round fired is the squib, the barrel's fine, and the instructor was wrong.

If a second "normal" round was subsequently fired without removing the squib first, chances are (although not always) the barrel may be ringed or otherwise affected.

At an LE training session years ago, I got a squib lodged in the bore of my Smith 25-5 .45 Colt from an HSM lead load.

Caught it in time, did not fire a second shot.

Actually borrowed a steel rod from the instructor (Dennis Tueller, who now teaches for Glock) to punch it out, finished the class & in all the rounds through that gun since, zero signs of any ringing or adverse effects on the barrel.

If, for whatever reason, a bullet doesn't have enough steam to exit the bore, it simply did not have enough energy (gas pressure) to generate sufficient velocity to overcome friction between bullet and rifling.

As mentioned, a squib typically should exert no more (actually less) stress on the bore than tapping a lead ball down it to slug that bore, which is a common practice.

The idea of insisting on a regular practice of replacing any barrel that encountered a squib is overly cautious, to say the least.
Denis
 
Pond said:
I can see what the person is thinking: that once the bullet is stationary it essentially acts as a plug to the roiling masses of hot gases behind the bullet and that they'll only have one way to go: through the barrel wall.
Click to expand...

The reason the bullet is stationary is that the roiling masses of hot gas behind the bullet were insufficient to push it out of the barrel. If it can't push the bullet, it sure can't bust through the barrel wall...


.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, High Valley, the kinetic energy of the moving bullet has to go somewhere when the bullet suddenly stops. Energy does not simply "go away", it is converted into another form of energy, in this case, heat. if the heat were applied slowly, as with a torch, the steel would discolor because it absorbs oxygen from the air. But in the case of a heat "dump", the change is so rapid that the discoloration never gets a chance to take place. The barrel is bulged by the pressure of the following gas, but it has to be softened up by heat first. The actual bulging is done by the gas, whether directly, or by expanding the bullets doesn't really matter. If a second bullet is driven into a stuck bullet using, say, a steel rod, there will be no heat dump and no barrel bulge.

Note that if a bullet is lodged in the barrel in such a way that the next bullet is behind and touching it, there is no time for the second bullet to build up energy; the two bullets will simply be fired as a double weight bullet. In experiments with a .45 auto pistol, I filled the barrel with lead bullets (6) and then loaded a factory FMJ round behind them, with no gaps between bullets. When the gun was fired, all that happened was that I had a sandbox with seven bullets in it.

Many of these things have been proven by testing and can be checked with any knowledgeable physicist. It is not really rocket science.

Jim
 
Huh?? If that's the case . . . fell that "instructor" to pack up all his "damaged barrels" and send them to me - I'll dispose of them. :D:roll eyes:

And . . . I have a couple of revolvers that I just might as well take a hacksaw and cut up.

Squibs "happen". I've had one . . and it was my fault. I didn't drop a powder charge - and just the primer put the lead slug past the forcing cone. Even a barrel with a bulge can shoot well depending where it is. Yes . . inspect the barrel after a squib . . it it shows a crack or extensive damage then certainly the safe thing to do is replace it whether it be a semi or a wheelgun. But if you are shooting . . you need to be aware of each shot. Stack two or more on top of each other and it's on you . . . but things do happen.

Personally . . . I'd be looking for a different instructor . . but that's just me.
 
Come on folks, try and keep straight who is say what!:confused:

James K wrote:
Sorry, High Valley, the kinetic energy of the moving bullet has to go somewhere when the bullet suddenly stops. Energy does not simply "go away", it is converted into another form of energy, in this case, heat. if the heat were applied slowly, as with a torch, the steel would discolor because it absorbs oxygen from the air.
Click to expand...

Sorry High Valley infers that I was disputing you. But if you read carefully, it was T O'Heir who disputed you.

Post 17: James K talking about heat dump
Post 24: T Oheir disputing James K's theory and confusing it with instructor
Post 26: Me quoting T Oheir asking if he's confused who said that
Post 30: Jame K thinking that I was disputing him?

BedBugbilly wrote:
Personally . . . I'd be looking for a different instructor . . but that's just me.
Click to expand...

One time required class. That's all.
 
The reason the bullet is stationary is that the roiling masses of hot gas behind the bullet were insufficient to push it out of the barrel. If it can't push the bullet, it sure can't bust through the barrel wall...
Click to expand...

Yep. The same point I made in the rest of my post! ;)
 
DPris said:
The idea of insisting on a regular practice of replacing any barrel that encountered a squib is overly cautious, to say the least.
Click to expand...
IMHO it's not just "overly cautious." It's irresponsible and unfair to the student involved.

The opening post reported that the instructor refused to allow the student to continue the class. It wasn't mentioned whether or not the student was given a full refund for the tuition, but my guess would be probably not. So, because of the instructor's ignorance, a student may have lost the cost of a course. The student definitely lost a day out of his life, plus whatever costs he (or she) incurred in traveling to and from the location where the course was held.

This incident reminds me of a gentleman who posted in the "Gunsmithing" discussion area of the M1911.org forum a number of years ago that, as an instructor, he refused to allow anyone in his classes with those new-fangled Colts because they were all defective -- the hammer would drop from half cock if you pulled the trigger. So he not only told students that perfectly good guns (because that's the way Series 80 Colts work) were defective, he wouldn't allow them to take his class unless they let him "fix" their non-defective guns. God only knows how he "fixed" them.

In the case of the [alleged] gentleman at M1911.org, he posted hoping for validation from a bunch of 1911 cognoscenti. What he got instead was a bunch of people taking him to task for not knowing how a Series 80 Colt functions. He became so abusive when called out that the moderators finally banned him.

People who don't know what they're talking about should NOT be teaching. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
 
A squib is actually what killed the young prodigy "Brandon Lee."

I am chirping in, being people tend to be concerned very with cleaning rods in their barrels if brass or aluminum, and others are advising to drop a punch down the barrel and hammer the projectile it out!?!?

It would seem that one may want to take some caution when driving a projectile out of the barrel, albeit especially since it is normally twisting in the lands when being fired, but will likely be going directly forward, which seems kinda rough.

On the other hand, not the need for a new barrel unless your filthy rich and or a gunsmith and I haven't done bad i my career, but I would not replace it, I would hire a professional to remove it. Wow, learn something new everyday for sure though.

I would think masking a punch or rod with tape and lube would be a good idea.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Best Regards

WH
Click to expand...

Is that a True Detective among us?!
Hope your lines of firearm enquiry yield pleasant and helpful fruit!! Mine certainly have.
Welcome to the board.

Pretty much my second home as my very patient wife will testify!! :D
 
Last edited:
Man you guys are not reading carefully and making me have to work!:mad:
Post #35
AB wrote:
The opening post reported that the instructor refused to allow the student to continue the class.
Click to expand...

That's not what I posted!
I had written in post10:
As qualifying range officer, he was concerned enough about this incident as to not allow the participant to continue qualify with that weapon until the barrel was replace.
Click to expand...

Posts 36-39
-CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED-?
What this have to do with the thread?
 
I alway find it puzzling that these thread so often turn into personal attacks.

All I asked was a simple question about whether people thought if the instructors statement was right or wrong.
But I guess people always need to extend it to he wrong and he's a jerk for being wrong.

Is there anyone who wrote that the instructor was wrong and should not be teaching ever make an error in their statements or knowledge also? Then should we never believe any words here on this forum that you ever say again.

Calm down people.
I don't have a dog in this fight, I just asked people's opinion on whether this theory was true. The consensus is that is is not.

And that is enough without having to go into the attacks on the class or instructor.

I don't know this instructor and have no feelings about it one way or the other. Since I took the class and have no ill feelings about the time I spent in the class, why should anyone here be so upset about it?

I learned some things and took others with a grain of salt.
So what!
Jeez!
 
This is an extreme example of something I see almost daily on the gunboards, an excess of caution.
The most common example is
OP: "I just got a used/surplus/heirloom gun, isn't that neat! I can't wait to try it out."
Board: "Ohmygod, don't shoot it, it might be damaged/altered/inadequate, take it to a gunsmith and have it checked out."

There is a considerable shortage of gunsmiths qualified to inspect and approve random guns on the market. So what is the poor OP to do?

Another sad case is guns being sent back to attention of the warranty clerk for all manner of minor flaws. (There is also the sad case of new guns having to be sent back for major flaws, too.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top