a__l__a__n
Inactive
Thanks for the perspective. It makes a lot of sense that the Lil Gun issue is more of a big bore problem since the volume of powder is so much greater there. I'll be keeping an eye on it though.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
LIL'Gun in 357 mag
- Thread starter ruger357w
- Start date
buck460XVR
New member
No wonder Bob Baker wrecked his gun with the stuff, although there had to be some recklessness on his part to keep shooting a gun that hot.
It was not his gun, but customer guns. Here is a statement he made about it 6 years ago....and yes, it's about use in .357s.
We have seen numerous barrels damaged by using Lil Gun. According to customers, some had as few as 30 rounds using Lil Gun through them, some had several hundred. Before we figured out what was happening one customer had sent his gun in for a new barrel. Then 600 rounds later it came back for another new barrel.
A couple years ago we did a test with a M83, .357 Mag. using Hornady 180 gr. bullets. We loaded 50 rds. of three different loads. One was a heavy H-110 load and the other two both used Lil Gun in different quantities.
We fired the H-110 loads first, then cut off the threaded end of the barrel. Rethreaded the barrel and shot one of the Lil Gun loads then rethreaded the barrel and shot the last Lil Gun load.
We found even the light load of Lil Gun caused the gun to get extremely hot. The heavy Lil Gun load had the gun so hot the only place we could touch the gun was on the grips and they were very hot.
Under magnification the surface appeared to have heated to a point of flowing using the Lil Gun loads and the heavy load was worse than the light load. This is probably due to Lil Gun having about 10% more nitro glycerin in it than H-110.
This is not internet rumor passed on by self appointed gun forum gurus. One needs to assess the risk and go from there. The heat you feel in your firearms is not whats hurting them. They could get so hot you couldn't touch them(I've shot my M92 .357 carbine with Lil' Gun that got there) and there is not going to be any damage....but, the heat from gases produced and flowing thru the chamber, forcing cone and the initial centimeter in the barrel will. Waiting a minutes between shots for the bulk of the gun to cool down is not going to make a difference or reduce that damage.
a__l__a__n
Inactive
buck460XVR wrote:
Also, the heat on affected parts does accumulate with more shots, and cooling down between shots will address that accumulation.
Yes, but note that he apparently shot 50 rounds in a single session. His experiment does not establish that a cylinder or two of shots would produce damage.It was not his gun, but customer guns. Here is a statement he made about it 6 years ago....and yes, it's about use in .357s.
Also, the heat on affected parts does accumulate with more shots, and cooling down between shots will address that accumulation.
buck460XVR
New member
Yes, but note that he apparently shot 50 rounds in a single session. His experiment does not establish that a cylinder or two of shots would produce damage.
Also, the heat on affected parts does accumulate with more shots, and cooling down between shots will address that accumulation.
Forcing cone erosion and barrel erosion is not produced by the accumulated heat buildup from shooting too many rounds too quickly. Forcing cone erosion is produced by the hot gases that escape around the bullet as it passes thru the cylinder gap each and every time a bullet is fired. This is why light for caliber bullets pushed by slow burning powders are avoided by many revolver shooters. It not the temperature of the gun that is causing the erosion, but the short bullet that allows hots gases and still burning powder to escape around it, unlike in a rifle or pistol where the bullet seals the gases behind it until it leaves the barrel. IOWs, one will experience the same amount of erosion if they shoot 200 bullets over a years time, or 200 bullets at one sitting. That's just how it works. Only difference is the amount of heat the bulk of the firearm accumulates, which doesn't matter anyway. While waiting for the gun to cool between shots may be easier on your hands, it ain't gonna make one titch of difference to the forcing cone.
Even without a erosion issue, I would probably have stopped using Lil' Gun anyways. I'm not the guy who plans a day at the range to shoot 1 or 2 cylinders worth of ammo outta one gun and call it a day. I generally make a day of it. When using Lil' Gun, having to take a break, just because all 5-6 guns I took that day are too hot to shoot comfortably, doesn't make sense. Especially since there are other options that give me the same performance without making my firearms too hot to handle. You are correct tho....folks that shoot one cylinder worth of ammo at every range session probably do not have to worry about wearing out the forcing cone in their lifetime.
a__l__a__n
Inactive
I don't buy your argument that accumulated heat is not a factor. The temperature of the forcing cone at the peak of ignition is a function of its temperature before ignition, plus the heat of ignition.
In a rifle, there is no cylinder gap, so the flames of ignition all go into the barrel. That's why barrel heating is an issue with rifles, and why rifles with high repetition rates require some means of cooling the barrel.
In any case, I won't use this particular ammo the same way you use your ammo. I'll test a small number of rounds in a given revolver, and then carry it when I feel I need that kind of ammo - mainly when in remote woods. I doubt I'll ever make it through this box of 50 rounds in my lifetime. When at the range I'll be shooting mostly 38 special rounds (bullseye) or moderate 357 rounds loaded with AA#9. There's no reason for 180 grains at 1400 fps if I'm just putting holes in paper.
In a rifle, there is no cylinder gap, so the flames of ignition all go into the barrel. That's why barrel heating is an issue with rifles, and why rifles with high repetition rates require some means of cooling the barrel.
In any case, I won't use this particular ammo the same way you use your ammo. I'll test a small number of rounds in a given revolver, and then carry it when I feel I need that kind of ammo - mainly when in remote woods. I doubt I'll ever make it through this box of 50 rounds in my lifetime. When at the range I'll be shooting mostly 38 special rounds (bullseye) or moderate 357 rounds loaded with AA#9. There's no reason for 180 grains at 1400 fps if I'm just putting holes in paper.
Last edited:
buck460XVR
New member
That's why barrel heating is an issue with rifles, and why rifles with high repetition rates require some means of cooling the barrel.
If you are talking machine guns, the high heat produced is from the friction of the bullets going down the barrel. You are talking 900-1200 rounds per minute over a sustained amount of time. You are never going to shoot your revolver fast enough and long enough to worry about that.
a__l__a__n
Inactive
Rifle Barrel Burn Out
Quote:
Quote:
Mechanical erosion, however, is definitely in third place as a cause of barrel burnout, far behind thermal and chemical erosion in all but very low-pressure cartridges.
Obviously, the easiest way to avoid burning out a barrel is not to shoot quickly and repeatedly, thus avoiding heat build-up.
Last edited:
buck460XVR
New member
But we are talking forcing cone erosion, not barrel burnout. Many folk believe that the cause of the excessive erosion caused by Lil' Gun is due to the chemical and mechanical erosion along with the thermal. If you think slow shooting is going to keep all forcing cone erosion from happening, good luck with that. Your guns, your choice is the point being made. One just needs to be aware there is a risk.