ohland
07-05-2015, 09:32 PM
Another look at the period approach to reloading.
Recreation, vol 51, No. 5, Nov 1914, pages 271-273
https://books.google.com/books?id=DYA7AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA273&dq=38-55+bullet+mould&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DMiZVZqBPIrBtQWWlYvwBQ&ved=0CFcQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=38-55%20bullet%20mould&f=false
Doctored Shells For Shooting Ills
To find out what your gun, be it shotgun or rifle, will do with different loads and which is the load best suited to it, for each particular need, there is no way to get at the facts except to experiment, and none so good as to load your own ammunition and try it out
By Willam Monebak
IN the early fall when you took out the shotgun after its long I sleep, did you ever, Mr. Average Shooter, put a newspaper up on the fence, pace off forty yards, and blaze away at the paper to get the pattern of your gun? If you did, it may be that you were surprised at the result. The old gun was not doing as well as it had—or perhaps you were glad to see it was doing a great deal better than you thought it capable of. Then you tried it for penetration, on a soft pine board. Were you disgusted that Jim, who has a much cheaper gun than you have, one not so well made or finished, did better with his gun? That night after you crawled into bed you were thinking it over and perhaps it was the shells: for you weren't using the same load or make of shells as you were last year when you beat Jim and his old rattletrap gun all hollow.
And that is just the point. It certainly must have been the shells and the way they were loaded that made the difference. If you will take the trouble to experiment a little, you will discover many things about your gun in particular and guns in general that you did not suspect before. In the end, likely as not, you will save a good arm from being wrongly condemned, for a shortcoming arising out of the use of the wrong load. And this applies equally as well to rifles and rifle ammunition.
Of course we know that the way a shotgun barrel is shaped on the inside has a great deal to do with the pattern and penetration of a charge of shot fired from it, as has also the length of the barrel with reference to the choke at the muzzle. But in experimenting you will find that by changing the loads, you change the characteristics of your gun, so to speak. And by load we mean the kind of powder, both quality and quantity; the kind of wadding and the amount and material that it is made of, also the firmness with which it is packed on the powder; the size of the shot you use and the crimping of the shell. Furthermore, the material of which the shell is made, and the priming, make a difference, but the effect of change is not so noticeable in the former and in this article we will take it for granted that you will use a fair average shell and primer, to go properly with the powder you are using, for information concerning which you have but to consult the catalogues.
Before we go further let me say I am not an enemy of factory loaded ammunition; quite the contrary. It has been developed to the point of perfection for guns and rifles, speaking broadly of them as a class. But for the best results in some individual guns and to find out what your gun, be it shotgun or rifle, will do with different loads and which is the load best suited to it, for each particular need, there is no way to get at the facts except to experiment, and none so good as to load your own ammunition and try it out. There is, also, the item of expense. The cost of experimenting with factory-loaded ammunition is naturally bound to be much greater, as you must buy at least a b0x of every different load you wish to try. And again, if you are a heavy user of ammunition, the fact that your shooting costs you from a third to twice as much for the same shell loaded at the factory, as compared with the hand loaded product, may mean something to you.
A Deer Gun That Mended Its Ways
I first became interested in the difference that loads make in a gun when I started to experiment with a shotgun that I bought from a farmer in the mountains of New Hampshire. We were going deer shooting that day and with one or two others I was waiting outside the farmhouse for the last of the party to appear. When he came out he carried a little shotgun which he said belonged to his father and was the first gun he ever used. I looked it over. It had 22-inch barrels and was correspondingly short in the stock—a muzzle loader, percussion-cap gun, of course. But it was well made, bound in brass, and it could be taken down by unhooking a bar in the stock. The owner handed it to one of the men to shoot. When it was fired, the man who shot it was nearly knocked over, so great was the kick, and along with the cloud of black powder smoke came a great wad of green grass that had been used as “wadding”. No wonder it kicked.
I bought this gun for, I think, two dollars and a half. When I came to examine it more closely, I found the hall mark of a great English gun maker on it, and also the mark "13," which I believe was the gauge of the gun, as it was wide open bore (not merely cylinder) and a 12-gauge wad fitted very snugly. And that fall, with this relic I spent a great deal of time experimenting both for pattern and penetration, and also used it in the woods. For grouse shooting in thick cover before the leaves were off it was ideal, as it would spread perfectly all over the side of a house at twenty yards! But I admit I did have difficulty keeping the caps on—and it is slightly annoying to have the hammers go down without results when you are looking over your gun at a flying grouse. I found, however, such wide variation in the shooting of this gun with different wadding and different proportions of powder to shot, that it brought me to experimenting with modern shotguns—both pump action and double barreled. During that summer I am sure I wore out a good fence and ruined all the newspapers that came on the place taking patterns.
Pattern And Penetration
In shooting ducks, of course you want penetration; but you should not have so much powder in the charge that the gun throws a stringy or scraggly pattern. If you are not using enough shot in proportion to the charge of powder, you will find the pattern is wild, and moreover no two patterns with the same charge will run evenly. Too much shot will likewise give poor results. What you are looking for is the maximum of penetration with the most even and closest pattern you can get.
Again, in hunting woodcock, for instance, you are looking for something very different. Conditions in hunting ducks vary as widely from woodcock conditions as the birds themselves are different. In the latter hunting you have a bird that is tender and easily stopped. You needn’t care a whoop about penetration, but you must have a good big even pattern at a much shorter range.
The requirements of different shooters, even among those having guns of a like make and model, and the results obtained by using like loads, in such guns, vary so much that it is impracticable to give in this article any instructions, or even general rules, for loading. Besides, detailed instructions and valuable information are to be found in the handbooks of the manufacturers of loading tools. You will, of course, require a set of these tools, which are cheap and easy to handle. There are several good makes on the market, notably the Ideal, the Hunter and the B.G.I. I have used only the former, but have always found them to be relied on to give even results and likewise found the handbook published by the manufacturer valuable to have as a guide. It will give you a vast amount of technical information which of necessity cannot be included in a short article like this. As to the tools you buy, I would lay especial stress upon getting a good re-capper; for you will have many a miss-fire unless your primers are properly seated.
Then you will want several makes of powder (small cans of each), either the material for bullets or various sizes of chilled shot, and the necessary wads. In getting the latter be sure to provide several varieties, as the difference in the shooting depends a great deal on the wadding of the shell.
When you start the experimenting with your own pet and particular shotgun it will be best to commence with a certain factory loaded shell, taking this load and pattern as a basis of comparison as to the results. Also, it is best to keep but one item variable. I mean by this—experiment, say, with powders first. Keep the loads and shot quantities constant while you change the powder, all the while noting the results you are getting. Then you can keep the powder and shot the same while you shift the kinds of wadding and the amount, and so on. If you have never tried it you will find the different results surprising. Incidentally you will be so interested that if the neighbors don't object to your banging away, with your reloading tools handy for another try with a different load, you will be mighty lucky.
It does not take any great labor or intelligence to load shells or cartridges. Quite the contrary, it is a very satisfactory “something to do" of evenings, for it keeps your hands busy and you are thinking out schemes of one kind and another. And in the end, if you shoot much or really care for the sport, you need not be surprised to find that you much prefer your own shells, as you may discover that the particular load that you want cannot be had in a regular factory load. Not only that, you will find the reduced cost in your shell bill will be very well worth while, as not only is the initial cost for new material far less, but you can use the cases over several times without impairing their usefulness in the slightest degree. On paper shells alone that are saved and reloaded you will soon be enough ahead to buy a complete set of tools, even if you only use the shells once again; for those empty shells are worth close to one dollar per hundred to you if you are going to reload them, whereas in constantly using factory-loaded ammunition you must count them as so much lost. By that I mean the second loading will cost you about four dollars and eighty cents per case less than did the original case of shells. But when out hunting, when you save these shells do not put them in the same pocket with the loaded ones. I have painful recollections of digging out empties in searching for loaded shells while the dog was making supercanine efforts to hold his point.
Getting To Work
In your experimenting you will find that, given the same amount of powder in a shell, the kick varies directly with the amount of shot ahead of the powder. You can prove this easily to your own satisfaction if you will withdraw the shot from the shell and fill the cavity with wads. The “kick” will be practically unnoticeable; so if you have a gun that you don’t like on account of the excessive recoil, you can usually find a remedy in a load which gives satisfactory results without so much “comeback.” You may be surprised to find your prejudice was misplaced and it has been your ammunition that was at fault. Also, in shooting the gun without the shot, you may note that with a heavy charge of powder it is not all burnt up. That indicates there is incomplete combustion and a consequent waste of power, for of course only burnt powder can be considered as “exerted force."
Of course you know that some powders burn slower than others. Perhaps you will find your gun will not give the proper penetration to the shot, and all your increasing the charge of powder or lessening the quantity of shot does no good. Probably the answer is that your powder is not burning up completely in the barrel. In this case the answer is that you should use for that gun a different powder—one from which you can get quicker and thus complete combustion. This fault is more apt to be noticed in short-barreled guns than in long, as of course there is more chance for combustion in the latter, there being a longer period during which the gases are compressed. Let this sink in, if you shoot a short-barreled brush gun.
You know, of course, what nitro-glycerin is—and you know it is as near “liquid hell” as chemistry can get. Its properties are such that it is better forgotten. At any rate, it explodes with such suddenness that instead of following the line of least resistance, as does powder, it simply overlooks the fact that there is any resistance. Dynamite is only a milder form of glycerin compound, growing more mild as the per cent of glycerin decreases, and it is designated by this per cent. For several years I had an excellent chance to observe the effects of different varieties and makes of explosives in the granite quarries along the Atlantic coast and the different results obtained by using dynamite or black powder. It is on account of the uncontrollable suddenness of dynamite that you cannot use it in small arms ammunition, and not because of the old fallacy that dynamite explodes so that the greater force is exerted in the direction of the earth. Dynamite does not explode downward—its force is exerted equally in all directions; but the action is so rapid that no particular direction is taken and conditions under which it is generally used make it appear that it "explodes down.” Powder, on the other hand, is slower burning, exerting a gradual "push" instead of a sudden “kick,” as is the case with the glycerin compounds; but powders vary in the quickness of combustion very materially. You may have some difficulty in selecting the particular brand of powder best suited to your gun so that you will get the best results, but that does not detract from your reason for experimenting, rather increases it. So I advise trying all brands, of both the "dense" and “bulk" varieties, whether you favor any particular one or not. Only do not take any chances with smokeless powder—especially the dense, or nitro, brands—in an old-fashioned gun made only to shoot black powder. The word nitro is significant enough of what will happen if you do.
Some time ago, in a chemistry lecture, I watched a demonstration of the burning qualities of different powders, both American and imported. A number of brands were spread out on a table in thin parallel lines, the weight of powder being the same in each case. Then each line was ignited at the same moment. In every brand there was a difference in the speed of burning, in the color of the flame, in the amount of fumes, etc., depending on the materials and proportions from which the powder was made. While this experiment has little practical value for guns, it illustrates very well the vast difference in powders. Nor will any experiment with powders burned freely in the air prove much, as it is not assured that the same powders under pressure will exhibit the same characteristics—speed of burning, etc.
Smokeless powder was originated, of course, by substituting chemicals in black powder to take the place of charcoal, thus giving a powder that would give practically complete combustion. But since the first smokeless, there have been so many substitutions and changes in materials that there are now vast differences among the smokeless powders. Of one thing, however, you may be sure. To get the powder best suited to your own gun is the most important task you have.
And you will find that the same holds good for the rifle as for the shotgun, only it may not at first be quite so apparent to you from experiments—on account of your unsteady hand, you might mistakenly call it. Look you!
Recreation, vol 51, No. 5, Nov 1914, pages 271-273
https://books.google.com/books?id=DYA7AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA273&dq=38-55+bullet+mould&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DMiZVZqBPIrBtQWWlYvwBQ&ved=0CFcQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=38-55%20bullet%20mould&f=false
Doctored Shells For Shooting Ills
To find out what your gun, be it shotgun or rifle, will do with different loads and which is the load best suited to it, for each particular need, there is no way to get at the facts except to experiment, and none so good as to load your own ammunition and try it out
By Willam Monebak
IN the early fall when you took out the shotgun after its long I sleep, did you ever, Mr. Average Shooter, put a newspaper up on the fence, pace off forty yards, and blaze away at the paper to get the pattern of your gun? If you did, it may be that you were surprised at the result. The old gun was not doing as well as it had—or perhaps you were glad to see it was doing a great deal better than you thought it capable of. Then you tried it for penetration, on a soft pine board. Were you disgusted that Jim, who has a much cheaper gun than you have, one not so well made or finished, did better with his gun? That night after you crawled into bed you were thinking it over and perhaps it was the shells: for you weren't using the same load or make of shells as you were last year when you beat Jim and his old rattletrap gun all hollow.
And that is just the point. It certainly must have been the shells and the way they were loaded that made the difference. If you will take the trouble to experiment a little, you will discover many things about your gun in particular and guns in general that you did not suspect before. In the end, likely as not, you will save a good arm from being wrongly condemned, for a shortcoming arising out of the use of the wrong load. And this applies equally as well to rifles and rifle ammunition.
Of course we know that the way a shotgun barrel is shaped on the inside has a great deal to do with the pattern and penetration of a charge of shot fired from it, as has also the length of the barrel with reference to the choke at the muzzle. But in experimenting you will find that by changing the loads, you change the characteristics of your gun, so to speak. And by load we mean the kind of powder, both quality and quantity; the kind of wadding and the amount and material that it is made of, also the firmness with which it is packed on the powder; the size of the shot you use and the crimping of the shell. Furthermore, the material of which the shell is made, and the priming, make a difference, but the effect of change is not so noticeable in the former and in this article we will take it for granted that you will use a fair average shell and primer, to go properly with the powder you are using, for information concerning which you have but to consult the catalogues.
Before we go further let me say I am not an enemy of factory loaded ammunition; quite the contrary. It has been developed to the point of perfection for guns and rifles, speaking broadly of them as a class. But for the best results in some individual guns and to find out what your gun, be it shotgun or rifle, will do with different loads and which is the load best suited to it, for each particular need, there is no way to get at the facts except to experiment, and none so good as to load your own ammunition and try it out. There is, also, the item of expense. The cost of experimenting with factory-loaded ammunition is naturally bound to be much greater, as you must buy at least a b0x of every different load you wish to try. And again, if you are a heavy user of ammunition, the fact that your shooting costs you from a third to twice as much for the same shell loaded at the factory, as compared with the hand loaded product, may mean something to you.
A Deer Gun That Mended Its Ways
I first became interested in the difference that loads make in a gun when I started to experiment with a shotgun that I bought from a farmer in the mountains of New Hampshire. We were going deer shooting that day and with one or two others I was waiting outside the farmhouse for the last of the party to appear. When he came out he carried a little shotgun which he said belonged to his father and was the first gun he ever used. I looked it over. It had 22-inch barrels and was correspondingly short in the stock—a muzzle loader, percussion-cap gun, of course. But it was well made, bound in brass, and it could be taken down by unhooking a bar in the stock. The owner handed it to one of the men to shoot. When it was fired, the man who shot it was nearly knocked over, so great was the kick, and along with the cloud of black powder smoke came a great wad of green grass that had been used as “wadding”. No wonder it kicked.
I bought this gun for, I think, two dollars and a half. When I came to examine it more closely, I found the hall mark of a great English gun maker on it, and also the mark "13," which I believe was the gauge of the gun, as it was wide open bore (not merely cylinder) and a 12-gauge wad fitted very snugly. And that fall, with this relic I spent a great deal of time experimenting both for pattern and penetration, and also used it in the woods. For grouse shooting in thick cover before the leaves were off it was ideal, as it would spread perfectly all over the side of a house at twenty yards! But I admit I did have difficulty keeping the caps on—and it is slightly annoying to have the hammers go down without results when you are looking over your gun at a flying grouse. I found, however, such wide variation in the shooting of this gun with different wadding and different proportions of powder to shot, that it brought me to experimenting with modern shotguns—both pump action and double barreled. During that summer I am sure I wore out a good fence and ruined all the newspapers that came on the place taking patterns.
Pattern And Penetration
In shooting ducks, of course you want penetration; but you should not have so much powder in the charge that the gun throws a stringy or scraggly pattern. If you are not using enough shot in proportion to the charge of powder, you will find the pattern is wild, and moreover no two patterns with the same charge will run evenly. Too much shot will likewise give poor results. What you are looking for is the maximum of penetration with the most even and closest pattern you can get.
Again, in hunting woodcock, for instance, you are looking for something very different. Conditions in hunting ducks vary as widely from woodcock conditions as the birds themselves are different. In the latter hunting you have a bird that is tender and easily stopped. You needn’t care a whoop about penetration, but you must have a good big even pattern at a much shorter range.
The requirements of different shooters, even among those having guns of a like make and model, and the results obtained by using like loads, in such guns, vary so much that it is impracticable to give in this article any instructions, or even general rules, for loading. Besides, detailed instructions and valuable information are to be found in the handbooks of the manufacturers of loading tools. You will, of course, require a set of these tools, which are cheap and easy to handle. There are several good makes on the market, notably the Ideal, the Hunter and the B.G.I. I have used only the former, but have always found them to be relied on to give even results and likewise found the handbook published by the manufacturer valuable to have as a guide. It will give you a vast amount of technical information which of necessity cannot be included in a short article like this. As to the tools you buy, I would lay especial stress upon getting a good re-capper; for you will have many a miss-fire unless your primers are properly seated.
Then you will want several makes of powder (small cans of each), either the material for bullets or various sizes of chilled shot, and the necessary wads. In getting the latter be sure to provide several varieties, as the difference in the shooting depends a great deal on the wadding of the shell.
When you start the experimenting with your own pet and particular shotgun it will be best to commence with a certain factory loaded shell, taking this load and pattern as a basis of comparison as to the results. Also, it is best to keep but one item variable. I mean by this—experiment, say, with powders first. Keep the loads and shot quantities constant while you change the powder, all the while noting the results you are getting. Then you can keep the powder and shot the same while you shift the kinds of wadding and the amount, and so on. If you have never tried it you will find the different results surprising. Incidentally you will be so interested that if the neighbors don't object to your banging away, with your reloading tools handy for another try with a different load, you will be mighty lucky.
It does not take any great labor or intelligence to load shells or cartridges. Quite the contrary, it is a very satisfactory “something to do" of evenings, for it keeps your hands busy and you are thinking out schemes of one kind and another. And in the end, if you shoot much or really care for the sport, you need not be surprised to find that you much prefer your own shells, as you may discover that the particular load that you want cannot be had in a regular factory load. Not only that, you will find the reduced cost in your shell bill will be very well worth while, as not only is the initial cost for new material far less, but you can use the cases over several times without impairing their usefulness in the slightest degree. On paper shells alone that are saved and reloaded you will soon be enough ahead to buy a complete set of tools, even if you only use the shells once again; for those empty shells are worth close to one dollar per hundred to you if you are going to reload them, whereas in constantly using factory-loaded ammunition you must count them as so much lost. By that I mean the second loading will cost you about four dollars and eighty cents per case less than did the original case of shells. But when out hunting, when you save these shells do not put them in the same pocket with the loaded ones. I have painful recollections of digging out empties in searching for loaded shells while the dog was making supercanine efforts to hold his point.
Getting To Work
In your experimenting you will find that, given the same amount of powder in a shell, the kick varies directly with the amount of shot ahead of the powder. You can prove this easily to your own satisfaction if you will withdraw the shot from the shell and fill the cavity with wads. The “kick” will be practically unnoticeable; so if you have a gun that you don’t like on account of the excessive recoil, you can usually find a remedy in a load which gives satisfactory results without so much “comeback.” You may be surprised to find your prejudice was misplaced and it has been your ammunition that was at fault. Also, in shooting the gun without the shot, you may note that with a heavy charge of powder it is not all burnt up. That indicates there is incomplete combustion and a consequent waste of power, for of course only burnt powder can be considered as “exerted force."
Of course you know that some powders burn slower than others. Perhaps you will find your gun will not give the proper penetration to the shot, and all your increasing the charge of powder or lessening the quantity of shot does no good. Probably the answer is that your powder is not burning up completely in the barrel. In this case the answer is that you should use for that gun a different powder—one from which you can get quicker and thus complete combustion. This fault is more apt to be noticed in short-barreled guns than in long, as of course there is more chance for combustion in the latter, there being a longer period during which the gases are compressed. Let this sink in, if you shoot a short-barreled brush gun.
You know, of course, what nitro-glycerin is—and you know it is as near “liquid hell” as chemistry can get. Its properties are such that it is better forgotten. At any rate, it explodes with such suddenness that instead of following the line of least resistance, as does powder, it simply overlooks the fact that there is any resistance. Dynamite is only a milder form of glycerin compound, growing more mild as the per cent of glycerin decreases, and it is designated by this per cent. For several years I had an excellent chance to observe the effects of different varieties and makes of explosives in the granite quarries along the Atlantic coast and the different results obtained by using dynamite or black powder. It is on account of the uncontrollable suddenness of dynamite that you cannot use it in small arms ammunition, and not because of the old fallacy that dynamite explodes so that the greater force is exerted in the direction of the earth. Dynamite does not explode downward—its force is exerted equally in all directions; but the action is so rapid that no particular direction is taken and conditions under which it is generally used make it appear that it "explodes down.” Powder, on the other hand, is slower burning, exerting a gradual "push" instead of a sudden “kick,” as is the case with the glycerin compounds; but powders vary in the quickness of combustion very materially. You may have some difficulty in selecting the particular brand of powder best suited to your gun so that you will get the best results, but that does not detract from your reason for experimenting, rather increases it. So I advise trying all brands, of both the "dense" and “bulk" varieties, whether you favor any particular one or not. Only do not take any chances with smokeless powder—especially the dense, or nitro, brands—in an old-fashioned gun made only to shoot black powder. The word nitro is significant enough of what will happen if you do.
Some time ago, in a chemistry lecture, I watched a demonstration of the burning qualities of different powders, both American and imported. A number of brands were spread out on a table in thin parallel lines, the weight of powder being the same in each case. Then each line was ignited at the same moment. In every brand there was a difference in the speed of burning, in the color of the flame, in the amount of fumes, etc., depending on the materials and proportions from which the powder was made. While this experiment has little practical value for guns, it illustrates very well the vast difference in powders. Nor will any experiment with powders burned freely in the air prove much, as it is not assured that the same powders under pressure will exhibit the same characteristics—speed of burning, etc.
Smokeless powder was originated, of course, by substituting chemicals in black powder to take the place of charcoal, thus giving a powder that would give practically complete combustion. But since the first smokeless, there have been so many substitutions and changes in materials that there are now vast differences among the smokeless powders. Of one thing, however, you may be sure. To get the powder best suited to your own gun is the most important task you have.
And you will find that the same holds good for the rifle as for the shotgun, only it may not at first be quite so apparent to you from experiments—on account of your unsteady hand, you might mistakenly call it. Look you!