Marlin 1895 blows up.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:24 pm

Pay attention when reloading boys.

http://www.trapshooters.com/cfpages/thr ... did=147092

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:29 pm

No way would i keep RL-7 AND #7 in the same work space.

No way, no how.

WCF3030 · Post by **WCF3030** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:42 pm

One powder on the bench at a time.
Words to live by.
#7 and Re-7 look nothing alike.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:47 pm

That had to hurt!

clubkey · Post by **clubkey** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:13 pm

Thank you Tycer, an excellent reminder about reloading safety...

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:32 pm

I wish the powder companies (and other manufacturers of stuff) would be a little better at their naming systems, and I ALSO fault all the reloading manuals which just list "No. 7" or some such in the 'powder' column.

That's one reason to double check a load with the manufacturer's OWN data to see if it is at least in their ballpark for that or a similar cartridge...

I saw somewhere (a gunsmith column about re-doing it in .450 Alaskan maybe) that the chamber wall on the Marlin 1895 is ONLY 0.1" thick at the thinnest portion

(LOOK at the second photo in the link above at the barrel where it tore open on the lower edge); that seems like it's 'cutting it a bit thin' - literally. One of the problems is the magazine tube hole is so close to the barrel hole, as well as the receiver being none too wide.

It would be nice if Marlin (Remington, or whoever) would just scale up the design of the 1894 and 1895 about 15% for each, so we could have .480 Ruger, .475 Linebaugh, or .460 S&W "1894's" and no-holds-barred "1895's" The designs are wonderful but when you get into the larger diameter (funner to shoot) cartridges, there's little room for error. Really, how much 'engineering' would that entail, vs. the NEW guns they keep introducing in the firearms industry? Surely the design is off-patent; in fact, perhaps they could patent the scale-up somehow by the usual industrial slight-of-hand.

One reason I guess I like the .357 (and .32-20 even though it's a low-pressure round anyway) - lots more thick steel around the cartridge.

Still, if Ruger can build .480 REVOLVERS, S&W can build .460 REVOLVERS, and FA can build .454 REVOLVERS, you'd think somehow a levergun could be made using a traditional design to handle those rounds, with the cartridge right in a BARREL instead of a cyilinder with six or seven large holes in it.

Post by **Old Savage** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:48 pm

Don't know about the 450 Alaskan but in 45-70 the chamber wall is over .2" in the 1895SS except where it is supported by the receiver. Seems it would be wise to use it for what it was manufactured for. If I was a manufacturer I wouldn't be trying to cater to wildcatters fun. Especially in todays litigious society.

Jack Huntington for one refused to make 450 Alaskans in the 1895s.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:03 pm

Ultimately, one's safety is greatly influenced by how one uses the gray "blob" between one's ears.

Post by **Chuck 100 yd** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:06 pm

Notice that the breech bolt and locking lug did not fail. Much discussion has been made on the strength of these rifles on this and other forums.
I think they are plenty strong enough for any sane loads in any cartridge chambered by the factory.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:49 pm

Mic discusses the design concerns that AJMD429 states on the lever action gunsmith portion of this forum under What is Possible with the Marlin. Design concerns are are my words. I have had many conversations with Mic regarding this very subject. If I am not mistaken the unfortunate soul mistook RL-7 for #7. I have no idea what the pressure generated was but my lord that load was a BOMB. It is a testament to the Marlin design that the locking lug/ bolt relationship was preserved and was not protruding from that dudes anatomy. Be safe. 1886. Am I mistaken or has this picture been posted in the past?

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:04 pm

OUCH
live and learn the hard way...

Post by **Old Savage** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:09 pm

Trying to compare and interpolate or extrapolate with AA loading data this must have been in the area of a double charge or greater.

Pisgah · Post by **Pisgah** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:12 pm

Regarding redesigns to make existing models stronger -- hey, NO design is idiot-proof! I'm not calling the guy that had this near-disaster an idiot, but as even he was quoted, "I screwed up".

If those two powders looked alike, or were packaged at all similarly, I'd apportion some blame towards the manufacturers. But, no -- this was operator error, a brainfart pure and simple and, thank God, no worse than it was.

Paul Jenkins · Post by **Paul Jenkins** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:22 pm

I had a fellow trapshooter almost shoot my right heel off last yr. The shoot was over and he thought he put snap caps in hisO/U. Stupidity such as my trapshooter, your reloader, and accidental shootings while hunting are the shooting sports biggest problems. You said he served two tours in NAM. SO did my trapshooter and one aquaintance who ACCIDENILY killed his father in a deer hunting accident. One thing to say, STUPIDITY!!!

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:14 pm

OMG!

That guy is lucky - or blessed!

Jaguarundi · Post by **Jaguarundi** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:25 pm

Stupidity,lucky he didn't injure or kill a bystander.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:07 pm

also I try to load just one type of round in a session, so I don't use the wrong powder or amount or OAL. I have a .357 light load, a .357 medium load, and a 30-30 medium load, and I would hate to get confused on which powder and charge I'm using in the same session.

ernest haycox · Post by **ernest haycox** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:00 pm

That photo is scary!I had toyed with the idea of getting into reloading in a limited way that would'nt get me killed or maimed.Is trailboss a kindof blackpowder substitute in smokeless for blackpowder?In other words,might it be harder to have an accident with a forgiving powder that fluffs out and fills the cartridge,lessening the chance of an accident?It would be nice if i could start out with one powder and keep it simple even if i did'nt get max. performance.I'm just a plinker anyway.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:04 pm

Imagine if you were sitting next to this guy at the range. You did not load his ammo, you may not even know him. But you could get seriously injured through no fault of your own. Makes wearing safety glasses make a lot of sense even if you are not actually shooting.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:44 pm

1886 wrote:Mic discusses the design concerns that AJMD429 states on the lever action gunsmith portion of this forum under What is Possible with the Marlin. Design concerns are are my words. I have had many conversations with Mic regarding this very subject. If I am not mistaken the unfortunate soul mistook RL-7 for #7. I have no idea what the pressure generated was but my lord that load was a BOMB. It is a testament to the Marlin design that the locking lug/ bolt relationship was preserved and was not protruding from that dudes anatomy. Be safe. 1886. Am I mistaken or has this picture been posted in the past?

The photo(s) were posted either here or on the Marlin forum in the past. I do think the action must be plenty strong to survive that load, and I'd a heck of alot rather have a barrel burst than an action fail!

I don't mean that we need 'idiot-proof' guns, but The 1895 was designed when the .45-70 was loaded to less pressures than some of the folks use now in bolt and falling block designs, and it would be nice to use those loads in a lever action. Nice, but not vital.

In addition, there are many truly high-pressure rounds out now that would be nice to have in a lever gun (.454 Casull is a NICE round, for instance) of the Marlin design, but as Mic points out, the Marlin as is won't safely handle those chamberings. Likewise for the milder pressure but larger diameter rounds like the .475/480 bunch.

I think a .480 Ruger, or .475 Linebaugh "pair" SA revolver and mid-size rifle would be just DANDY, and that's what I'd like Marlin to accomplish by scaling up their actions. Can't do it with the 1894 or 1895, but something just a tad larger in the same short action design should do it and do it well. That's all I'm saying.

Post by **Old Savage** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:16 am

The statement about the .1" measurement of the thinnest part of the chamber does refer to the 45-70 cartridge chambering and is in Mic McPhersons article - What is Possible with a Marlin. He refers to the chamber at the threads in my reading.

http://www.levergun.com/main_index.htm

Paul Jenkins · Post by **Paul Jenkins** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:07 am

ernest haycox wrote:That photo is scary!I had toyed with the idea of getting into reloading in a limited way that would'nt get me killed or maimed.Is trailboss a kindof blackpowder substitute in smokeless for blackpowder?In other words,might it be harder to have an accident with a forgiving powder that fluffs out and fills the cartridge,lessening the chance of an accident?It would be nice if i could start out with one powder and keep it simple even if i did'nt get max. performance.I'm just a plinker anyway.

Sir, Your questions and fears are just what I mentioned in my reply.
Reloading is not rocket science, but , common sense and care are required. I have been reloading since 1962 without an accident. Thousands and thousands of rds. reloaded and fired without incident. I started reloading the .218 bee with a nail and a 3/16" hole in a wood block. That was all the equipment I had. Just don't try everything you see written. Use a little sense.

stretch · Post by **stretch** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:53 am

Wow!

It just goes to show how unforgiving our little hobby can
be of inattention to detail. He's awfully lucky somebody
wasn't killed, eh?

Grizzly Adams · Post by **Grizzly Adams** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:27 am

Angel on the shoulder for sure. Glad it was not worse than it was.

IMHO, one of the factors that contributes to these kinds of failures is the perceived "need for speed." It is almost a "cultural" thing with shooters who buy the 45-70 or 450 big bore rifles. Instead of employing the old warrior in it's original form in terms of velocity etc, they feel it is necessary to load it to within a couple hundred fps of the 458 Win Mag. Why? Might have to shoot a bear or some such!

Or maybe just because they can and it's the "manly thing to do!" I don't know.

What seems to be lost is the fact that in it's "native" form, the 45-70 will effectively kill anything on this continent and then some. Big and slow is the way to go. It's the old paradigm!

revorg · Post by **revorg** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:40 am

That is the sort of silly mistake that could happen to anybody.

I try to do my loading with only a few different powders... and haveing two called "7" would make me nervous.

revorg

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:46 am

IMHO, one of the factors that contributes to these kinds of failures is the perceived "need for speed."

I agree. Even in the "strong" Puma action, I'm not pushing my .454 Casull as much as some try to; even in its 'moderate' loads it is a thumper. I DO wish however that they'd make leverguns for the bigger cartridges so I could use THEM at 'moderate' loads as well...

. . . think what fun a 'moderate' .460 S&W or .500 Linebaugh would be . . . in a levergun...!

Pisgah · Post by **Pisgah** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:01 pm

ernest haycox wrote:That photo is scary!I had toyed with the idea of getting into reloading in a limited way that would'nt get me killed or maimed.Is trailboss a kindof blackpowder substitute in smokeless for blackpowder?In other words,might it be harder to have an accident with a forgiving powder that fluffs out and fills the cartridge,lessening the chance of an accident?It would be nice if i could start out with one powder and keep it simple even if i did'nt get max. performance.I'm just a plinker anyway.

Reloading is much safer than many activities you engage in every day without thought or concern, from taking a bath to driving a car. Every powder is just as safe as every other powder -- or just as dangerous! You MUST learn, and adhere to, the basics of reloading. You MUST follow load data of known reliability. You MUST pay attention to what you're doing. Accidents such as this one should not make you afraid of reloading; rather, they should make you determined to do it right!

And NO!!! TRAILBOSS IS NOT A BP SUBSTITUTE!!! It is a smokeless powder with totally different characteristics than black powder. It is entirely possible to overload with Trailboss, particularly if loaded as a BP equivalent. Since it is very bulky, "fluffy" powder it is good for low-to-medium velocity loads in large-capacity cases. It will more completely fill the case than other powders which might be used for the same type of loads, and this will tend to reduce shot-to-shot- velocity variations.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:16 pm

Trailboss is an excellent powder and I burn a lot of it. But it is not a substitute for black powder.

Post by **Old Savage** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:22 pm

I shot a couple of McPhersons 1894 Marlin creations on large pistol calibers at the So Cal gathering. Very interesting guns.

Texican · Post by **Texican** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:45 pm

Chuck 100 yd wrote:Notice that the breech bolt and locking lug did not fail. Much discussion has been made on the strength of these rifles on this and other forums.
I think they are plenty strong enough for any sane loads in any cartridge chambered by the factory.

+1

Marlin 1895 blows up.

Marlin 1895 blows up.

45-70 blows up