pirkfan
07-06-2012, 11:14 PM
I have a Do-It slingshot pellet mold which casts 1/10 oz pellets approximately 0.305 in diameter. I have not been able to find published reloading data for a buckshot pellet that falls somewhere between 0 and #1 buckshot. In addition, published buckshot loads (even Lyman’s 5th edition) often call for components that aren’t locally available OR are no longer manufactured, notably the WAA12R and WAA12 114 wads. I wanted to be able to make up some buckshot loads from locally available components (a very limited selection at best), and to keep the product as inexpensive (less than $0.25 per shell) as possible.
I decided on a load consisting of Remington Gun Club 12 gauge hulls, Remington 209P primer, 17.0 grains of Red Dot, a Winchester WAA12 (1 1/8 oz) wad, (all of which are readily available in my area), and 1 1/8 oz shot. I set my reloading scale to 492 grains, placed 9 of the slingshot pellets on the scale and then added #4 birdshot until I had a total load weight of 492 grains (1 1/8 oz). This turned out to be 18 +/- 1 pellet of #4 shot in addition to the slingshot pellets. This sounds a bit tedious, but once I realized that it took 18 pellets of #4 to complete the 1 1/8 oz load, I would just count them onto the scale pan. After primer, powder and wad were inserted into the hull, I layered the bottom of the wad with #4 shot from the weighed load until a uniform layer covered the base of the wad. This took 13 or 14 of the #4 shot pellets. Since I knew I’d have 4 or 5 pellets of birdshot remaining after the initial layer, I poured the shot in the hull, holding back that many pellets. I then layered in 3 of the slingshot pellets, and placed 3 of the remaining #4 pellets in the spaces between the buckshot. This was followed by another layer of 3 buckshot, placing the remaining 1 or 2 birdshot in the spaces between the buckshot. A final layer of 3 buckshot completed the load. #4 birdshot is large enough that it will not pass through the spaces between the buckshot pellets, so the layering is stable once crimped. (I placed the birdshot at the base of the shot column, because I’ve seen comments regarding other duplex loads, concerning positioning larger shot ahead of smaller. Apparently the feeling is that the larger pellets retain more velocity and the entire shot pattern would be disrupted by them passing through the lighter pellets.). All pellets were a good fit within the shot cup petals, and the load fits the Gun Club hull beautifully, with no crimping issues.
I fired a couple of similar loads (Winchester AA hull and Winchester primer were the main differences and the birdshot was #8) through a 18.5 inch cylinder bore (Mossberg 590A1), which produced buckshot patterns of about 6 inches at 10 yards. The birdshot was in a cloud around the buckshot. I had made no effort to layer the birdshot in those loads at the base of the wad, simply filling in the voids between buckshot as I layered them into the shell. I will be interested to see if these new reloads give tighter patterns.
My goal isn’t necessarily to produce a duplex load (the #4 birdshot is in the load only to bring the shot weight in compliance with a published load recipe.) I did this since no configuration of these slingshot pellets alone would meet any published reloading data AND fit locally available components. I intend to use these loads for plinking and varmint control (especially nutria). I’m interested in how others feel about the safety of this alteration?
I decided on a load consisting of Remington Gun Club 12 gauge hulls, Remington 209P primer, 17.0 grains of Red Dot, a Winchester WAA12 (1 1/8 oz) wad, (all of which are readily available in my area), and 1 1/8 oz shot. I set my reloading scale to 492 grains, placed 9 of the slingshot pellets on the scale and then added #4 birdshot until I had a total load weight of 492 grains (1 1/8 oz). This turned out to be 18 +/- 1 pellet of #4 shot in addition to the slingshot pellets. This sounds a bit tedious, but once I realized that it took 18 pellets of #4 to complete the 1 1/8 oz load, I would just count them onto the scale pan. After primer, powder and wad were inserted into the hull, I layered the bottom of the wad with #4 shot from the weighed load until a uniform layer covered the base of the wad. This took 13 or 14 of the #4 shot pellets. Since I knew I’d have 4 or 5 pellets of birdshot remaining after the initial layer, I poured the shot in the hull, holding back that many pellets. I then layered in 3 of the slingshot pellets, and placed 3 of the remaining #4 pellets in the spaces between the buckshot. This was followed by another layer of 3 buckshot, placing the remaining 1 or 2 birdshot in the spaces between the buckshot. A final layer of 3 buckshot completed the load. #4 birdshot is large enough that it will not pass through the spaces between the buckshot pellets, so the layering is stable once crimped. (I placed the birdshot at the base of the shot column, because I’ve seen comments regarding other duplex loads, concerning positioning larger shot ahead of smaller. Apparently the feeling is that the larger pellets retain more velocity and the entire shot pattern would be disrupted by them passing through the lighter pellets.). All pellets were a good fit within the shot cup petals, and the load fits the Gun Club hull beautifully, with no crimping issues.
I fired a couple of similar loads (Winchester AA hull and Winchester primer were the main differences and the birdshot was #8) through a 18.5 inch cylinder bore (Mossberg 590A1), which produced buckshot patterns of about 6 inches at 10 yards. The birdshot was in a cloud around the buckshot. I had made no effort to layer the birdshot in those loads at the base of the wad, simply filling in the voids between buckshot as I layered them into the shell. I will be interested to see if these new reloads give tighter patterns.
My goal isn’t necessarily to produce a duplex load (the #4 birdshot is in the load only to bring the shot weight in compliance with a published load recipe.) I did this since no configuration of these slingshot pellets alone would meet any published reloading data AND fit locally available components. I intend to use these loads for plinking and varmint control (especially nutria). I’m interested in how others feel about the safety of this alteration?