Tmi?

[Hogtamer]

It occurred to me as I plowed through tons of loading data and search for specified components that maybe, just maybe, I was being played for a sucker. For around 15 years the only shotgun data I consumed was the single sheets that came with the Lee Load All, a portion of which is pictured here.

I'll say 20k rounds or so for everything to upland birds, ducks, geese, turkey, deer and the occasional clay target. If you can read the print on the photo you'll see there are exactly 2 specifications for hulls; paper/composite base wads and plastic. Not a hint about straight walled or tapered, roll crimp or star. Primers are not even mentioned, nor wads. The new sheets are just like the ones 40 years old except for inclusion of some different powders. Not that complicated.

Now it seems we are compelled to consult this manual and that; use a very specific proprietary component no matter how inconsequential. I know, I know, the information age and better measurement techniques leads to vastly improved specialization and performance and safety. Or dare I think MARKETING has become ever more specialized to provide new profit opportunites for manufacturers and sales outlets? Like soap powders ever new; new and improved; extreme cleaning; gentler to the environment; reformulated and even better; smarter for today's new washers; gentler; 25% more free; exciting new look; fresh new scent; 30% more effective; etc, etc.

OK, I'm through now. But the world didn't end yesterday when I used a cardboard card over a couple grains shy of suggested powder yesterday, then the recommended winchester wad on top of that to use in a cheap Federal plastic base hull. They shot great. No lawyer showed up at my door. And the deer I hopefully shoot soon won't care what put the big hole through his lungs. Here's to a simpler 2019!

[jmort]

Shotgun hull pressures while rather low in comparison to metallic cases, do spike rather easily. I have a lot of load data for a lot of components. It really helps me doing load work up with the components I have. You have to be careful doing load work up with different components. But I have a lot of components and yet not always exactly what is specified. Also doing slug and ball/multi-ball, you may have to build a column and that takes some thought. Some are too sensitive about shotgun load work up, nothing wrong with that, but if you are careful and cautious you can safely do it. I like having a lot of load data but I get what you are saying.

[dverna]

There are more concerns with getting sued these days....and some people do not have much common sense. I believe those two reasons are more in play than any other.

BTW, I have seen some shotgun loads posted on this site that concerned me but there are those who want to push the limits. Not sure if the extra 100 fps matters when launching over an ounce of lead at a 150 lb deer but so be it.

Like you, I have been reloading for a long time. Over 150k shotgun shells. I have never had the need to tweak a published load very much (different primer or wad most common) but I do not tweak a load that is near maximum. For a beginner, they are safer not to experiment. A max load in a straight wall hull is going to be over max in a tapered hull. It may shoot just fine but that does not make it as safe.

I do not need maximum performance in my 12 ga. It is used mostly for Trap shooting and i never use maximum loads. I have substituted wads and primers in the 12 ga. The 20 and 28 ga are my primary hunting gauges and those are maximum or near max loads. I do not deviate at all on those loads as I use components that are easily acquired and buy enough to load for years of use. KISS. If a component becomes unavailable, I will use a new load with the correct hull, wad, primer and powder....with literally dozens of loads out there, finding a published load with common components is easy.

Slug users seem to be the worst "offenders". Trying to get maximum performance and acceptable accuracy is tough. Different slugs/balls, modified slugs, different wads, modified wads, different hulls, changing primers, to chase the goal. Suggesting it does not matter assumes others have your understanding. Many do not have your experience and intelligence.

When I was investigating slug loads, I saw load recommendations from respected members on this forum that I believed were unsafe. No one died or got injured....no one reported a blown up shotgun....at least that I know of....so I was wrong in my opinion. Maybe I am just too much of a scaredy cat. But I have also seen a barrel separate from the monobloc and a split barrel. A load that is "safe" for a handful of shots, may turn ugly after firing a few hundred in a gun with a weak design or slight metallurgical defect.

[jmort]

I never red-line any load, metallic or shotgun. Don't see the point.
But, I do like reading about the recoil insensitive and those who push the limit.
I don't want to be near that load when it is shot.

[GhostHawk]

Moderation in all things, including moderation.

Its your time, your shotgun, your life, your choice.

In todays sue happy environment company's have to be able to prove that for most conditions their loads are safe.

If you load only for yourself, you can cut all that **** out. Do it carefully.

[jdfoxinc]

BPI load Manuel's are definitely predjudced towards their components. So yes marketing has a lot to do with load data presentation.

[Treeman]

Richard Lee used some common sense............he looked at huge ammounts of data and chose powders and charge weights that were safe in any combination of components within the specified hull types. That still works. Were things can get sticky is with heavy payloads at high velocity...simply fewer workable combinations under max pressures, and ESPECIALLY with non toxic shot where the wads have little or no crush section and high velocities are considered desirable. I have long used Lee's system for the majority of my loading for the light target and field loads that constitute the bulk of my shooting(and the slug loads that I find pleasant to shoot) I'll stick to puplished recipe loads for steel shot.

[Markopolo]

Things were a lot simpler before the advent of Plastic wads. There were over powder cards, fiber waxed wads, overshot cards. These 3 things with straight walled hulls are the deal. I was reading in my old lyman 1955 manual, and those three thing were all there was, and life was simple. The hard part was deciding if you needed 2 hard cards and 1 fiber to get the best performance. I betcha you can get plenty of these using that method.


I did.

Marko

[longbow]

I am totally in agreement with Hal in that many things are needlessly complicated and much more finicky than they need to be. Back in the days of BP you the choice of brand, granulation and charge... if you were lucky. For many people brand and granulation may have been limited to what was made locally or what was sold in the one or two stores nearby.

Now we have multiple brands of powders and within each brand are many different burn rate powders. The choices seem endless and in combination with other components the load recipes are in fact endless. Where this modern situation differs with BP is that pressures are higher and more importantly small changes in components can result in large changes in pressure unlike BP loading.

It seems to me that everything is becoming too specialized now. Yes the results can be very good but you need an exact set of components and many load recipes do not list options for primers, wads, equivalent hulls, etc. When a simple primer change can result in 3000 PSI pressure difference which could result in over pressure or a blooper depending, a guy has to be careful.

I have often lamented the lack of the old bulk shotgun powders that replaced BP or more general load recipes like Lee published so when you don't have exactly right components you can still load safely, albeit resulting in lower performance loads. I'd rather have more options to use what I have or can get locally and be loading safely than wondering if I can substitute this primer for that one. That Lee data is on the right track but it would be nice if powder choices were expanded since that is a major limiting factor. If we had a smokeless powder that could be loaded like BP then we would be able to simply use more or less powder and adjust wad column to suit. I suppose a guy could use a BP sub but I think they burn hot and foul much like BP. Old style bulk smokeless would be more user friendly I think.

Simple is good!

Longbow

[W.R.Buchanan]

It occurred to me as I plowed through tons of loading data and search for specified components that maybe, just maybe, I was being played for a sucker. For around 15 years the only shotgun data I consumed was the single sheets that came with the Lee Load All, a portion of which is pictured here.

I'll say 20k rounds or so for everything to upland birds, ducks, geese, turkey, deer and the occasional clay target. If you can read the print on the photo you'll see there are exactly 2 specifications for hulls; paper/composite base wads and plastic. Not a hint about straight walled or tapered, roll crimp or star. Primers are not even mentioned, nor wads. The new sheets are just like the ones 40 years old except for inclusion of some different powders. Not that complicated.

Now it seems we are compelled to consult this manual and that; use a very specific proprietary component no matter how inconsequential. I know, I know, the information age and better measurement techniques leads to vastly improved specialization and performance and safety. Or dare I think MARKETING has become ever more specialized to provide new profit opportunites for manufacturers and sales outlets? Like soap powders ever new; new and improved; extreme cleaning; gentler to the environment; reformulated and even better; smarter for today's new washers; gentler; 25% more free; exciting new look; fresh new scent; 30% more effective; etc, etc.

OK, I'm through now. But the world didn't end yesterday when I used a cardboard card over a couple grains shy of suggested powder yesterday, then the recommended winchester wad on top of that to use in a cheap Federal plastic base hull. They shot great. No lawyer showed up at my door. And the deer I hopefully shoot soon won't care what put the big hole through his lungs. Here's to a simpler 2019!

Always glad to see the big light bulb turn on, when guys figure it out. People questioned me when I told them I was running my Pumpkin Balls in my regular Trap Loads nothing different than 1 1/8 ox of shot versus 1 oz of ball. My gosh do ya think that hull knew the difference?

There is a mentality in the shotgun reloading world that "Recipes" must be followed exactly or death will occur. In some cases that may be true but on the low end it ain't true at all.

When I "down load" a pressure tested load, IE: put less powder in the hull. It doesn't raise the pressure. Simple as that.

By the same token that doesn't mean I will just change things around willy nilly without some thought as to how my changes will affect pressures or performance.

All of Lee's Load Data that comes with their tools is on the low side. Always has been, and that is due to powder dippers being used to dispense powder which is not the most precise method.

When I got my first Lee Loader I immediately bought a Lee Priming tool and a little Redding Scale. I knew that the dipper I got with the Lee Loader was not going to be exact. But really no big deal cuz their published load data was very conservative. But Lee understood that small differences in a load aren't going to make any significant difference, (Especially in 1971 when groups were bigger), and as long as they were below max loads nobody would blow themselves up. A definite CYA move on his part.

In shotgun loading I see the use of certain primers being the single biggest cause of pressure spikes. Federal Primers being the most spikey. I don't see hull construction being a big problem and some wads are going to change pressures a small amount.

Here's a hot tip: If you want to substitute this or that component but are unsure what will happen, go to your loading manuals, like the ones with 1100 different "Recipes" using every combination of components there is, and compare the pressures in the right column between recipes that use most of the same components but change maybe one. It is called interpolation.

Typically they are classed by Hull Type but will have loads using different primers and wads. They are also classed by velocity.

There are 4 basic velocity levels of shotgun shells. 1100 fps, 1300 fps, 1600 fps, and 1800 fps. Obviously there are loads in between these numbers, but these are the basic levels.

If you are playing around in the 1100-1300 fps range there isn't much you can do that will blow up in your face. The pressures are below 10K psi. This is where the vast majority of loads I shoot are placed. These are also below virtually every factory load available. The slowest I've seen are Estate #8's at 1145 fps. All of the slugs I have shot have been in the 1300 fps range, except the 2 Federal Butt Kickers which were at 1610 and hurt me big time!

All that said,,, I do not condone playing on the top end and pushing the velocities pressures up. Here's the big reason why...

There is absolutely no reason on this planet why you need to push velocities and pressure past what established factory loads are at.... Period!

There is nothing on this planet that will be shot with a shotgun, that will be killed any deader with anything you can make, than what you can buy over the counter. So that pretty much defines what your top end should be kept below. As long as you are well below that you can experiment.

My .02

Randy

[Rcmaveric]

I am weary of playing with shot gun components. All i can get locally is Winchester primers which limits me severely in choices with with Rem Gun Club hulls.

Untill i find a book and how to develop shotgun loads i will continue to be weary of deviation. When I lack knowledge and experince i error on the side of caution.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[W.R.Buchanan]

Caution is not a bad idea! Ignorance is usually what gets you hurt.

Education is the cure for Ignorance, but you can't fix stupid, and a man has got to know his limitations.

Randy

[jmort]

I think it is most interesting, the whole load development challange.
I like having lots of data to look at.

[faustus]

Caution is not a bad idea! Ignorance is usually what gets you hurt.

Education is the cure for Ignorance, but you can't fix stupid, and a man has got to know his limitations.

Randy

+ 2 ... and well said!

[OnHoPr]

Well, I suppose I am going to get flamed on this one, but I think wildcatters with the shotshell have improved general shotgunning and specialty loads for many. A bit of factory ammo has had its origins developed from wildcatters, though the ammo companies have tweaked the loads to certain saami specifications. For instance, back in the ole lead shot days (circa 60s) the waterfowlers started putting flour and cornmeal type material in 3” 12 ga BBs and 2s to shoot in the ole Mossberg and Marlin 36” bolt action 12 gas for pass shooting for geese. So, the ammo companies seen this and developed buffer to tighten up patterns for specialty loads.

Is there any published data from the ammo companies showing where to put 100 to 120 grs of Reloader 17 in a shotgun hull for slugs? Back 5 years ago or better there was a bit of wildcatting development on this sight and a bit over on SW. But, then a certain group of shooters went bizonkers like the world is flat over what was being discussed. Now that discussion has stopped. Sad, just because of some fear mongers. Strange too, because it seems like they blow up a gun at the clays range about every week with their published loads.

How about this scenario, here are a few thoughts about a proposed hypothetical load.

12 ga 2.75 and 3” hulls and/or their chambered guns are saami 11,500 psi.

12 ga 3.5” hulls and/or their chambered guns are rated saami 14,000 psi.

There are 12 ga 3” 1 oz slugs pushing 1760 fps out of the 11.5K guns.

There are now Sporting Clays loads pushing (published data) over 1500 fps with a 2.75" 1.25 oz load in 2.75 & 3” 11.5 k guns with the newer powders. Not saying that they couldn’t have done that with any of the older powders.

The clays reloader is always looking for economics and softer on the shoulder scenarios. If they see that they only get 60 shots
out of a lb. of powder, they cringe at the thought and think about their shoulder.

Now, given those basic base lines who is to say or why could not you load a 2.75” hull with 1 1/8 oz load to 14,000 psi and shoot it out of a 12 ga 3.5” chambered gun with a saami of 14,000 psi. (For your own personal consumption) You could fill the shot cup with 8s giving you 459 pellets pushing 1,700 to 1,800 fps with a turkey choked 3.5” gun giving you a pretty tight dense pattern out pass 40 yds and only kicking like a heavy 1.25 to 1.5 oz hunting load. That’s giving you twice more pellets than 2 oz of 6s in a 3” hull while still having more velocity @ 40 yds than the conventional loads @ muzzle. Where is the data for that hypothetical scenario? Well the ammo companies couldn't because somebody might shoot that load out of a 11.5 K psi gun, correct. Unless they came up with some form of +P labeling like they do with hang gun ammo. Maybe cheaper than marketed factory turkey loads or cut into their profits. More pellets, denser pattern, lighter kicking, and enough energy for a turkey head/neck shot pass 40 yds.

And forget the big BS, “Well, if you were a real hunter you would call them in closer.”

[Hogtamer]

Good comments all and of course caution as with any explosive. Look, I love BPI and others who give us shotgunners choices no one else does. I'm saying that in an average 1 1/8 oz shot load with a plastic wad, I'm not worried about this wad or that was with similar dimensions. A couple of years ago until recently Cheddite hulls were all the rage at BPI, even their own Cheddite manual to sell you. Now they don't have them in stock but plenty of Fiocchi hulls that are suddenly better. Of course that means Fiocchi 616 primers blah blah. I wish some one would measure Cheddite, Fiocchi, Rios and the cheap federals and post internal capacity of all. I'm not here to tell you to interchange them at will. BUt if you look enough data (and I have) you'll discover practically identical loads for them all, just not from the same source. And don't think that because there may be 200o loads in some manual that they have all been physically loaded and tested. Maybe half the different shot loads I've tried in NO WAY comport with proper crimps...too low or too high by far and I say wow, no one has loaded this, just computer prognostications about PSI and FPS.

Yes, above all be safe, NEVER be careless. For the first time I can remember I gave my sons a flat of store bought shotshells for Christmas. The fun ain't enough when it cost me 15% more to load 'em myself and ever-changing and ever higher price components are the root of the problem. Thanks for all the feedback and your help bringing me along with the specialty stuff over the years.

BTW, shot 6" group with Lymans and rifled gun at 140 yds today. Yessiree.

And grandson got his first time behind the wheel with an old 3 speed munual transmission. Ground less gears then I did the first time iirc.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Wow 6" at 140 is exactly what we are all looking for. That is truly usable Rifle Accuracy with the power of a Dangerous Game Rifle from a commonly available shotgun.

I got into this quest when I came back from my last Tactical Shotgun Class at Front Sight. IE: Nov 2018. I wanted to be able to shoot slugs out to 100 yards with some chance of connecting with a man sized target and this was not predictable with Factory Slugs from smoothbore barrels.. I did it mainly to amuse myself and see the looks on Instructors faces when I showed them what the weapons they were teaching us to run would actually do when fed the right ammo.

They were impressed with the Vang Comp Barrel's performance and several sent their barrels off for the mods. If I can get the A5 to shoot like a rifle then they will really be impressed, and hopefully others in the class will follow along.

All the Factory loaded slugs I shoot right now are running at 1300 fps. I see no reason to go faster except if I get to go to the far north and shoot a big bear or something I'd want something a bit faster. The slugs with dedicated hunting uses will be running faster simply because I will only be shooting one or two at a time. For testing and sighting the gun in I have access to a lead sled.

But even after all that I see no reason to push the envelope and I should be able to get what I want at 1500 fps or slightly below. In other words even a Polar Bear wouldn't know if it got hit by a slug going 1500 or 1600 fps. and neither would anything else. The shear knock down power of at 500 gr slug is going to be devastating to anything it hits. I've got slugs right now that are up over. 600+ gr and most of them are at at least 490-500+gr. Even the Lee slugs are 480 gr. with the wad attached. They are the practice rounds to drill repeat shots on a moving target (Wild Boar Fever) That's what the A5 with rifled barrel is for.

I think the first thing that needs to happen anytime you venture into a quest is that you need to define your expectations. This usually takes the form of a picture in your head,,, or some call it a "Vision."

If your "Vision" is realistic then it can come to fruition, and happiness will follow. If it is not Realistic, then chances are you have fallen victim to the "You can make anything work in your head,,," syndrome. Reality is a totally different mistress.

Seen this last one many times and it is a shame, because the main cause of it is not understanding everything you know about something and thus having unrealistic expectations. Usually disappointment follows and along with it comes spite for those who are successful. But you can only blame yourself for not educating yourself sufficiently on the subject you have pursued and not learning from your mistakes.

If you read my signature below you need to understand that being able to do what you don't know how to do, is not about blind luck. It's about having a wide enough knowledge base to be able to solve new problems by using existing knowledge, and or obtaining or developing new knowledge by either education or learning from your mistakes. The latter method is known as the "School of Hard Knocks!"

Still works.

Randy

[RMc]

Lee Load-All Charge Tables:

12 Gauge

https://www.titanreloading.com/image...DF/12gauge.pdf

16 and 20 Gauge:

https://leeprecision.com/cgi-data/instruct/LA1071.pdf

[William Yanda]

Lee Load-All Charge Tables:

12 Gauge

https://www.titanreloading.com/image...DF/12gauge.pdf

16 and 20 Gauge:

https://leeprecision.com/cgi-data/instruct/LA1071.pdf

Now that's what I call helpful, printed both of them.

[missionary5155]

Thank you for those tables ! Have them loaded and will think on them often.
Mike in Peru