Reloading EverythingTitan ReloadingMidSouth Shooters SupplyLee Precision
RepackboxInline FabricationRotoMetals2Wideners
PBcastco Load Data
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 107

Thread: High performance buckshot - revisited...

  1. #41
    Boolit Master 5Shot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Colbert, WA
    Posts
    722
    I am not sure on the pressure differences, but the patterns I posted above were with a star crimp. Hard to get it all in there with such a crimp, and it is very flat, but the pattern speaks for itself. I reduced the powder charge by 2 grains.
    If you live on the razor's edge and slip, you will die in two pieces

  2. #42
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597
    What would an apples to apples pressure comparison between a roll crimp and fold crimp load require?


    Quote Originally Posted by Hogtamer View Post
    Lot of good info herein but I'm still looking for something definitive about roll crimping vs star crimp regarding pressure and pattern differences.

  3. #43
    Boolit Master

    Hogtamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    East central GA, Appling near Augusta
    Posts
    3,305
    In the rough and tumble moment of big pellets leaving a shotgun bore the answer can easily be found on paper. Pls 1911's posted pic @ 30 yds is remarkable out of an open choke in my experience but that load may not work nearly as well in another gun. I know this is a buckshot thread but my primary reason for asking regards slug loads which are mostly roll crimp from the factory. I don't have a roll crimper and wondering if it's it's worth the additional time and money needed.

  4. #44
    Boolit Master pls1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    CowTown... PantherCity... Texas
    Posts
    1,107
    RMC and Hogtamer,
    thanks for a great and very informative discussion.
    Somewhere when posting I believe I failed to mention that a wrap or two of tape around the wad petals helped achieve the group pictured, tightening the group by a couple of inches.
    We used to do that when pheasant hunting with IC choked guns too, and it made a significant difference.
    Salvaging old Marlins is not a pasttime...it's a passion

  5. #45
    Boolit Master

    Hogtamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    East central GA, Appling near Augusta
    Posts
    3,305
    What kind of tape do you use?

  6. #46
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597

    To roll or fold that is the crimp question!

    Since questions abound and definitive answers are quite elusive in the smoothbore world, I offer this link to those who wish to delve a bit deeper:

    https://www.riflemagazine.com/magazi...l79partial.pdf

    The late Don Zutz remained an educator, first and formost, even in his endeavors as a gunwriter - as this article exemplifies.
    Last edited by RMc; 09-26-2014 at 06:46 PM.

  7. #47
    Boolit Master

    Hogtamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    East central GA, Appling near Augusta
    Posts
    3,305
    Good read. Thx RMc!

  8. #48
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597
    A historical note:

    Many commercial shotshells continued to use bulk smokeless shotshell powders well into the 1940's and some into the early 1950's. These powders displaced the same hull space as black powder resulting in minimal card and filler wad columns. Dense smokeless powder target and light field loads then required a longer heavier wad column which added to the "ramming" effect noted by Zutz and verified by Winchester with high speed photography in the 1960's. High base, (high interior basewad), field hulls were introduced specifically to offset the need for a long card and filler stack. Today plastic wads and/or the use of lighter filler wad materials have eliminated the need for "high base" hulls.

    Note: High Base and High Brass are not the same thing.
    Last edited by RMc; 10-06-2014 at 12:48 PM.

  9. #49
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    here is a quote from BPI for what its worth:

    Does a shotshell roll crimp raise or lower pressures versus a fold crimp?

    Posted on December 14, 2012 by Ballistic Products
    Roll Crimps vs. Fold Crimps: Pressure differences
    We are often asked, “Does a roll crimp on a load raise or lower pressures?”
    The answer from our Lab:
    It is impossible to test every possible case and combination of fired hulls, etc. Shotshell tests are known as “destructive tests.” This means that they can never be duplicated again and generalizations cannot be derived from perceived patterns within destructive tests.
    We do know this: When roll crimping a new hull (i.e., a hull that has never before roll crimped or fold crimped) and given an equally-loaded and identical load that has been fold-crimped, the roll-crimped load never seems to achieve the pressure level of a fold crimped load. This is to say that lab patterns show that roll crimped loads in parallel load comparisons generally demonstrate lower pressures. Remember, this pattern is only with the loads that the ballistic lab has fired. The ballistic lab has NOT tested every possible load combination with this methodology.
    Here is a list of tested examples that our lab has compared:







    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

  10. #50
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597
    Cpileri,

    I'm glad you brought up the BP report.

    Notice the comparisons are for 2.75" hulls in all the test loads. Since a fold crimp substantially reduces the available load space in a given hull length, modern wad "cushion" sections will be compressed to a greater degree in a fold crimped shell. In addition the stiffer the "cushion" section of the wad the greater the compression. Looking at the BP report with these factors in mind, casts the results in a different light.

    To give a comparable example of greater load space involving only Fold Crimp loads, take a look at the following:

    https://www.ballisticproducts.com/VP53%20data.pdf


    Notice that load ID #80609 is for a 2.75" hull and ID #80616 is for a 3" hull. Even with the addition of an OSC to the otherwise identical 3" fold crimp load, the longer hull develops less pressure and velocity than its 2.75" brethren.

    According to BPI:

    The average case length needed is .40" for folded crimp vs .15" for rolled crimp. That is a .25" loaded length difference between rolled and folded crimp shells.

    To clarify the above, using the nominal new unfired empty hull length for illustration:

    2.50"-.15" = 2.35"
    Roll crimp 2.50" hull loaded length is 2.35"

    2.75"-.40" = 2.35"
    Fold crimp 2.75" hull loaded length is 2.35"

    2.75"-.15"= 2.60"
    Roll crimp 2.75" hull loaded length is 2.60"

    3.00"-.40"= 2.60"
    Fold crimp 3.00" hull loaded length is 2.60"


    Note: The above applies to shot and buckshot loads. Slug load roll crimps are normally much deeper.
    Last edited by RMc; 02-24-2021 at 01:25 AM. Reason: Update, replace dead link and clarification

  11. #51
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    Well suire, a longer shell gives more room for combustion (larger volume = lower pressure).

    The BPI data, taken for what its worth, is a direct comparison where the only variable is the roll or fold crimp.

    Or did i miss your point? (I very well could have)

    C-
    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

  12. #52
    Boolit Master pls1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    CowTown... PantherCity... Texas
    Posts
    1,107
    Hog tamer, I've used various tapes over the years, and never really researched the differences in effectiveness.
    Clear scotch tapes seems to work fine, as did masking tape with a graphite dusting.

    While my crude efforts and dabbling experience spans 40-odd years, it remains substantially less studious than RMc's, who has obviously had years of serious study of shot, chokes, load pressures, and pattern effects.
    With regard to shotgun performance intricacies, I'm little more than a caster/hacker/hunter and respectfully give thanks for those whose intense interest and deep study provides the rest of us a bit of learned guidance. Thanks to all.
    Salvaging old Marlins is not a pasttime...it's a passion

  13. #53
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    also,
    i was thinking of a 20ga companion load along the lines of the dixie 12ga load above. my factory loaded no3 buck in 20ga is a random looking stack of pellets with no wad petals/no wrap, in buffer, in layers of 3 or 4 pellets. but i was thinking that inside a wadcup, no2 or no3 buck pellets (either .24" or .27" diam) might also self stack in two pellet layers when poured into the shell.

    any thoughts on this idea?

    C-
    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

  14. #54
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    I was readinng the pdf Mr. McLaney posted, and the author keeps referencing his load using 1&7/8oz of "lubaloy".

    Did Winchester make lubaloy pellets? what were they? similar to their lubaloyed bullets? i.e. copper plated and coated w their special lubricating coating? that woudl be cool!
    Does graphite coated or nickel plated pellets of today perform a similar function?

    C-
    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

  15. #55
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597

    Variables and Crush Crimps?

    Actually more than one variable is present: Hull volume and crimp. Since the fold crimp takes up more shell length it reduces load space. An apples to apples comparison would require a reduced length hull for the roll crimp load to have equal crimped hull volume using the exact internal components + OS card for roll crimp.

    Frankly, a 2.75" roll crimped hull has virtually the same available load space as a 3" fold crimped hull. Given this reality, I would feel a great deal more comfort assembling a load designed for a 2.75" roll crimp hull into a fold crimped 3" hull - rather than trying to crush fit a 3.00" roll crimp load into a 3.00" fold crimped hull with a shorter loaded length.

    Remember a 2.75" roll crimped shotshell has the same loaded length as a 3" fold crimp shotshell - this is based on hulls of the same construction and basewad height.


    -----------------------------------------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by cpileri View Post
    Well suire, a longer shell gives more room for combustion (larger volume = lower pressure).

    The BPI data, taken for what its worth, is a direct comparison where the only variable is the roll or fold crimp.

    Or did i miss your point? (I very well could have)

    C-
    Last edited by RMc; 09-15-2019 at 09:12 PM. Reason: Clarification

  16. #56
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    that makes sense.
    C-
    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

  17. #57
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597

    No "Poke" needed.

    A .260" diameter pellet would probably come the closest to self stacking in layers of two inside most 20 gauge shot cup wads. The two pellets would have a minimum stacking width of .520" and would not need a "poke" to seat correctly at the base of the wad.

    Ballistic Products sells just such a buckshot pellet size under the moniker of #3 1/2 Super Buck - also known as #8 Western Buck.

    .260" #3 1/2 27.0 grains 16.2 per ounce 259 per Lb.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpileri View Post
    also,
    i was thinking of a 20ga companion load along the lines of the dixie 12ga load above. my factory loaded no3 buck in 20ga is a random looking stack of pellets with no wad petals/no wrap, in buffer, in layers of 3 or 4 pellets. but i was thinking that inside a wadcup, no2 or no3 buck pellets (either .24" or .27" diam) might also self stack in two pellet layers when poured into the shell.

    any thoughts on this idea?

    C-
    Last edited by RMc; 12-05-2020 at 04:56 PM. Reason: Clarification

  18. #58
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597

    In a word: "Lubricity"

    Plated pellets are supposed to deform less under acceleration. At least that is what the advertisements say. But not necessarily because a thin copper plating makes the shot significantly harder.

    "Lubricity" - copper plating has a lower coefficient of friction than lead, thus allowing the pellets to flow rather than bridge during the trip through the forcing cone, barrel and choke. So yes, less deformation under acceleration and round shot does retain velocity better.*

    It all goes back to Lubaloy copper plated shot which was introduced by Winchester in 1929.

    Lubaloy shot, the crown grade of premium hard shot and the copper plating in its time, was credited with maintaining round pellets, better long range waterfowl patterns and so on. But behind the marketing gee-whiz publicly associated with Lubaloy shot, perhaps the least known today is the prevention of shot clumping or fusing from propellant gas escaping around the card and fiber wads of the day.

    It was not until just before WWII that cup shaped formed paper gas seals were developed for shotshells (also by Winchester). Before that blow-by was a real concern in the shotgunning world. Obviously clumped shot could be dangerous at ranges far beyond the usual for a given shot size, not to mention possible pattern distruption. So Lubaloy copper plated shot was primarily developed to reduce or eliminate heat-fusing or clumping of shot pellets.

    Lubaloy shot was hailed in its time as an advance nearly equal to Winchester's intoduction of American made smokeless powder shotshells in 1900!

    *For all that, even copper plated shot should have an underlying lead alloy with a high antimony content of 4% or better.

    Unforturnately Lubaloy shot for the handloading market was discontinued by Winchester sometime around the late 1970s. So too have Hornady's Magnum Brand Copper Plated and Remington's Nickel Plated shot been discontinued in recent years.

    For a guide to current high antimony Electroplated Shot close to the quality of Lubaloy see:

    http://www.shotgunlife.com/shotguns/...ty-part-2.html


    ------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by cpileri View Post
    I was readinng the pdf Mr. McLaney posted, and the author keeps referencing his load using 1&7/8oz of "lubaloy".

    Did Winchester make lubaloy pellets? what were they? similar to their lubaloyed bullets? i.e. copper plated and coated w their special lubricating coating? that woudl be cool!
    Does graphite coated or nickel plated pellets of today perform a similar function?

    C-
    Last edited by RMc; 08-02-2020 at 12:01 AM. Reason: Replace dead link

  19. #59
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    597

    Fold crimp depth and increased pressure.

    Proper fold crimp depth is a pressure factor that most shotshell reloaders simply overlook. According to Hornady, proper fold crimp depth should be right at .055". Deeper crimps do run pressures up.

    Most shotshell presses have fold crimp depth adjustments to properly set a consistent crimp depth. However some, like the Lee Load All, have no such adjustments. Recently, I ran across an ingenious solution to this problem at the link below:

    http://www.rossi-rifleman.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=2265
    Last edited by RMc; 10-09-2014 at 06:50 PM.

  20. #60
    In Remembrance

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,329
    Neat idea!
    I actually made a smaller PVC sleeve to allow good crimps on the Load-All w 3" shells but the Load-All set for 2.75" hulls. The sleeve prevents the loader from smooshing the longer hulls too far.

    But this idea can work w any component combo if you measure everything correctly. i might have to spend some time cutting pipes later this month.

    C-
    ____________
    "...the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” -N.Postman

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check