Duplicating Flite Control #1/tightest buckshot possible

[302w]

I know this is more of a reloading question than casting, sorry..

I'm a newb with casting/reloading for shotguns but I would like to start loading an extremely tight patterning buckshot load. The now discontinued #1 Federal Flitecontol had decent patterns out to 50 yards with cylinder bore 18" shotguns.

Is there any comparable handload? I understand the proprietary wad was the largest contributor to accuracy.

[jmort]

No. The wad patent is intersting. The base and body have slits that open up and create drag on the wad which is compartalmized.
You can try. I wish we could buy the wads. I have considered cutting a wad to approximate the "air-brakes" on the Flite-Control wad.

[krallstar]

Always wanted to try this shell but never found any. Did not know they discontinued it.

[jmort]

You have to go with #00
Nothing compares to FliteControl

[RMc]

While the latest Flite Control Flex wad has been on the market since late 2016 for waterfowl and turkey loads, Federal Flite Control buckshot rounds apparently continue to employ the original wad design.

The Flite Control Flex wad was designed to be compatible with popular ported choke tubes.

This leads to speculation as to whether the original design is superior for buckshot use or the company is simply using up existing stocks of the older Flite Control design on a lower market share product.

http://www.americanhunter.org/articl...th-all-chokes/

[jmort]

May be the reason for no #1 Buckshot FliteControl. Discontinued, see other thread.
I do not see how you improve on the original FliteControl, but no doubt, at least for Birdshot it is better. Regardless, it is the ne plus ultra wad either way

[W.R.Buchanan]

In my class there was a couple of guys who had some Flight Control Ammo and I must say next to my Vang Comped Barrel they were impressive.

Not much difference at 5 and 7 yards but the FC wads made a big difference at 20 yards and those patterns were half what mine were, which was about 4-5"

I have pics of my patterns at various distances on my Tactical Shotgun Trip thread.

Randy

[Blood Trail]

You don’t need flight control wads for tight patterns at 50 yards. You can produce some very nice patterns using a variety of combinations like chokes/Mylar wraps and various wads. I’m editing a YouTube vid right now of me using Kick’s Buck Buster chokes.

Very impressive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blood Trail]

https://youtu.be/Vtkl9rktdCY


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RMc]

...
I do not see how you improve on the original FliteControl, but no doubt, at least for Birdshot it is better. Regardless, it is the ne plus ultra wad either way

Indeed so, Flite Control Buckshot put "tight pattern" and "cylinder bore" in the same sentence!

[Hogtamer]

Several years ago I was able to get several hundred of the originals fro a man in Alabama who demilled federal rejects and sold the components. Supposedly the rejects were from mislabeling, imperfect crimps and such. You can do a search and perhaps find the thread. The last time this came up his contact info no longer worked. The load was simple that he gave me. Fed hulls and primers, 32 grns Longshot, the flite control wads, (no buffer) and 8 - 00 pellets, fold crimp. Alas, about 1/3 of my loads produced essentially slugs (no separation), a third worked as advertised and about a third just so-so. The wads were very thick and rigid, most slightly discolored. I understood the principle but was unable to duplicate reliable success with the components I had. My impression was that the wads required a very specific pressure to work as advertised. The overpowder portion of the wad is supposed to come out of the barrel and flare, allowing for a perfectly clean release of the pellets from the wad. Again, these were second hand components so an imperfect comparison to factory loads.

[faustus]

Here what difference the Flightcontrol wad does for me .....

S&B unbuffered 00 Buckshot ... 9 pellets ... at 20 meters/yards ... and with an Improved Cylinder choke:



And the Federal 00 Buck with Flightcontrol wad .... at 30 meters/yards ... again Improved Cylinder choke:

[W.R.Buchanan]

Does anyone have a picture of a "Flitecontrol Wad?"

Does BPI have anything like it?

I would think that simply taping the petals of a regular wad so they couldn't open up would be a way to accomplish this.

It would seem that the wad would eventually separate due to aerodynamic drag which the shot wouldn't experience? Maybe? How far down range this would occur is an unknown.

We had one guy in our class who had some Federal FC shells and they were patterning at less than 2" at 20 yards. My Vang Comp Barrel was about 5" at the same distance with 00 with 000 it was bigger.

We shot alot of buckshot at 20 and 15 yards Prior to that we shot alot of birdshot which was done specifically to get our gun handling and manipulation down.

On a clean freshly painted target, my gun would completely erase the paint on the head of the target with bird shot, due to the density of the pattern at 15 yards. The head portion of these steel targets is about 6" square, and 12x18 overall.

We did 2 Hostage shots at the end of the course. (see Pics below) The accepted method of doing this when the takers head is only 50% visible and you are loaded with Buckshot with no chance to change ammo, you aim at the exposed ear and hope the wad doesn't kill the hostage. This is normally done at less than 7 yards. The other method is to advance forward and shoot the guy when you are inside 3 yards. At that distance the shot column is solid, and will remove his head or whatever else it hits. The wad should go thru the same hole at that distance.

Note in the pics below I was aiming at the outline of the head at ear height. The first one shows a 000 tight pattern (with 2 flyers) with the wad hitting in the shoulder, not that big a deal.

The second one shows a very tight pattern but the wad hit the hostage square in the face. That might be a problem.

An FC wad would still be with the shot at that distance and go thru the same hole.

I want to see an FC wad. I know we can make something similar that works.

Randy

[Blood Trail]

I get you can get real close to that with hand loads, especially at 20 yards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RMc]

You don’t need flight control wads for tight patterns at 50 yards. You can produce some very nice patterns using a variety of combinations like chokes/Mylar wraps and various wads.

You are indeed correct - when it comes to choke bore or choke tube shotguns.

[RMc]

Here what difference the Flightcontrol wad does for me .....

S&B unbuffered 00 Buckshot ... 9 pellets ... at 20 meters/yards ... and with an Improved Cylinder choke:



And the Federal 00 Buck with Flightcontrol wad .... at 30 meters/yards ... again Improved Cylinder choke:

Definitely a case of comparing the pattern performance extremes of "traditional" buckshot sizes.

[RMc]

Does anyone have a picture of a "Flitecontrol Wad?"

Does BPI have anything like it?

I would think that simply taping the petals of a regular wad so they couldn't open up would be a way to accomplish this.

It would seem that the wad would eventually separate due to aerodynamic drag which the shot wouldn't experience? Maybe? How far down range this would occur is an unknown.

We had one guy in our class who had some Federal FC shells and they were patterning at less than 2" at 20 yards. My Vang Comp Barrel was about 5" at the same distance with 00 with 000 it was bigger.

We shot alot of buckshot at 20 and 15 yards Prior to that we shot alot of birdshot which was done specifically to get our gun handling and manipulation down.

On a clean freshly painted target, my gun would completely erase the paint on the head of the target with bird shot, due to the density of the pattern at 15 yards. The head portion of these steel targets is about 6" square, and 12x18 overall.

We did 2 Hostage shots at the end of the course. (see Pics below) The accepted method of doing this when the takers head is only 50% visible and you are loaded with Buckshot with no chance to change ammo, you aim at the exposed ear and hope the wad doesn't kill the hostage. This is normally done at less than 7 yards. The other method is to advance forward and shoot the guy when you are inside 3 yards. At that distance the shot column is solid, and will remove his head or whatever else it hits. The wad should go thru the same hole at that distance.

Note in the pics below I was aiming at the outline of the head at ear height. The first one shows a 000 tight pattern (with 2 flyers) with the wad hitting in the shoulder, not that big a deal.

The second one shows a very tight pattern but the wad hit the hostage square in the face. That might be a problem.

An FC wad would still be with the shot at that distance and go thru the same hole.

I want to see an FC wad. I know we can make something similar that works.

Randy

This is just one of many patents associated with the Flite Control wad concept. It appears that quite a few years of patent protection may remain.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6260484B1/en

[SteveD]

I get you can get real close to that with hand loads, especially at 20 yards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd like more info on that.....

[Hogtamer]

It keeps coming up so I provide this link again for what to me is a perfect #1 buck load.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...hot-PERFECTION
The pic below is not this load, but a 10 pellet 3" 20 ga load @ 40 yd. Can't delete for some reason. But that's pretty good too...

[W.R.Buchanan]

OK; after looking at the patent pictures we could use regular Scotch Packaging Tape around the shot cup with some deployable strips of mylar around the periphery acting as drag planes to slow the wad down and release the shot. Then split the gas seal like 4-8 times around it so that it would expand after leaving the barrel and act like the fletching on a Badminton Birdie for more accuracy.

Any one who can operate a Razor Blade and Tape can do this.

As far as any Patent Protection goes, nobody cares about what we might do for our own personal purposes Now if you wanted to do this for Commercial Purposes you might have a problem if discovered by someone at Federal who actually cared.

The problem with patents is the fact that in order for them to have any teeth you must be able to defend them. This takes money. If the amount of money it takes to Defend said Patent is more than whatever can be recovered (if in fact you prevail) then it is obviously not worth pursuing. Also defending a patent is pointless if you only recover enough to pay the Lawyers. This is what usually happens with Class Action Lawsuits, you get $10 and the Lawyers get millions. I got exactly $7.30 from a Class Action against VW America over the Diesel BS. The law firm that brought the suit billed millions.

Now if you have a "Trademark" that is a completely different animal. You can take everything someone has as retribution for Trademark Infringement right down to their underwear.

Putting tape on a wad to try to improve its performance is not going to get you into trouble.

Randy