Federal hulls

[Taylor]

Anyone familiar with the Federal hull 3'' marked 00 buck from Ballistic Products? What load data/hull data would one use?

[rancher1913]

dont quote me on this but I believe federal hulls are similar to chedite, at least the field load ones are. you might have to cut it in two and compare to the chart in the shotshell manual

[megasupermagnum]

dont quote me on this but I believe federal hulls are similar to chedite, at least the field load ones are. you might have to cut it in two and compare to the chart in the shotshell manual

No, they are not that close to Cheddite. Cheddite and Fiocchi are close.

There are two versions of the 12 gauge Federal 3" hull. The paper basewad, and the plastic basewad. It is very easy to tell, just look into them. One will be brown paper, and the other will look like red plastic. You need to use the load data specific to each. The 3" paper basewad hull is not used as much anymore, but there is plenty of data out there. The 3" plastic basewad hull is often called the .090" basewad hull, and is likely what you have. It has plenty of data as well, and you can also use 3" Activ hull data, but there isn't much Activ data.

[Taylor]

The base wad is a clear/whitish color. Then of course, no matter what data I look at, it seems I don't have that powder.

[Taylor]

It is not an integral base wad

[Hogtamer]

What kind of load do you plan, buckshot, slug, birdshot, steel?

[Taylor]

I'm still trying to figger out a 1.75 using #5 shot. But considering the wad (white lightening) a 1 5/8, using some felt in the bottom of the cup. So far all load data want's a powder I don't have and they don't make anymore. What I have is HS6, Universal and Longshot. Saving the Longshot for my slug loads. Didn't think this would be as complicated as it has turned out. I thought if I could ID the hull I might have a better chance. I called BPI (Eric), was told the hull was bought with marking's from federal. Called federal (Ryan), hell they don't know.

[Taylor]

283507283508 Had to sacrifice a hull, at least I can save the primer.

[farmbif]

when in doubt I ask the folks at ballistic for advice on anything shotshell. ive never reloaded one like that but the Remington buckshot shells ive salvaged and reloaded folding the once rolled end was the only trick to look out for.
also might check volume with water and compare to other federal hulls if you have any.

[Hogtamer]

Fed 209a (already in hull) - 29.1 gr Longshot - WAA12 wad - 1 5/8 shot - 1225 fps - 10,000 psi That’s a butt kicker.
Page 54 here: http://www.tsn.biella.it/armi/ManualiRicarica/Hodgdon%20Basic%20Manual.pdf

[Taylor]

We're could I find a hard copy of that?

[tomme boy]

Those are not the buckshot hulls I have. Mine are one piece. Actually I have two types. One is a lighter shade of red and that is what you have. But mine are still a one piece hull. The lighter colored ones have a lower base than the ones your picture shows. There are also ones with a high brass like yours.

[Hogtamer]

click on the link I provided

[megasupermagnum]

I think there is some camera trickery going on here. If you notice, those hulls have a brass (actually steel) height about half of what the normal 3" hulls have. This is no issue. The other thing, is these have base wads with no color, which also makes them look different. According to BPI, and looking at those pictures, you have the Federal .090" basewad hull, AKA hunting hull, AKA plastic base.

Those are great hulls. Why are you so dead set on that TPS white lightning wad? It was never meant for lead shot. You won't find any data with universal for these heavy loads.

[Taylor]

megasupermagnum...Mostly because that is what I have as far as wads go. And if it will hold up to steel shot, should hold up to lead. I made a splitter from a broad head. Cuts 3 petals 3/4+" of wad. How about HS6?

[gpidaho]

Taylor: My thoughts here are just my opinion and have very little if any proof in factual experimentation. I wouldn't use a wad intended for steel shot for heavy lead loads. There are a few wads that have both steel and lead loads listed in loading manuals, the MG42 comes to mind, but most wads meant for steel shot lack the cushion of a wad meant for lead This COULD lead to a pressure spike that would be a real uncomfortable if not gun damaging event. Shotgun wads are SO inexpensive that I wouldn't wander off of published data just to use what's on hand. Keep in mind that we don't have much of a safety margin with shotguns like we have with rifles. Gp

[megasupermagnum]

There is nothing dangerous about putting lead shot into a steel shot wad. The problem being there is not much load data for them, and in your particular case, you have a discontinued wad that only lived a short life as a steel specific wad. Now take this with a heap of salt, but if I absolutely had to do it, I think the also discontinued, but long lived Multi-Metal wad data would be the place to look.

Personally I would not waste the time. Every year good shotgun load data becomes more and more scarce. It has become so bad, I don't know of anyone offering even a turkey load manual anymore.

I seem to recall you asking for data in another thread. I stand by my statement that buffer is a good thing if you are trying to make turkey loads. By no means do you need buffer to kill turkeys. You also don't need 1 3/4 oz of shot. But if your criteria is to even approach what a factory load will do, you will need to use buffer, there is no way around that. If you are simply looking to put together a non-buffered 1 3/4 oz load in a 3" Federal hull, I can help with that, but not with that wad.

Federal 3" PB hull
Federal 209A
27.5 gr Longshot
Remington SP12 wad
1 7/8 oz shot
fold crimp

1155 fps
9,600 psi

Me personally, I would substitute that SP12 wad with a Federal 12S4 wad, and use 1 3/4 oz of shot. The above load is from the Lyman shotshell 5th edition.

[Taylor]

Well I suppose it's evident that I'm pretty clueless when it comes to loading shot shells. All I load in shotgun is my slugs. Do I need a turkey load? Not really. I have a couple of boxes of Winchester Longbeards. And the way my season has been going, well...they may just last me the rest of my life.

It's that I have some parts and piece's. I like making my own stuff. I want to be able to make my own. As I'm sure you guy's understand that.

Is it that critical, to find a load, and the only difference is the wad? Can one not just swap out the wad? After all it's just a container for shot. Be it lead or steel. But my biggest issue was...what hull is that? I called BPI and Federal. Federal told me they should not have sold that hull to BPI. And BPI should not be selling it to the public. I guess one question..in turn..brings up a lot more. Believe me men, I'm listening, I'm learning. I really appreciate all that you say.

[gpidaho]

Taylor: Experiments and advice are are what forums are all about. In this instance, you seem to have a hull that is somewhat of a bastard child and a discontinued wad. What could possibly go wrong? Proceed if you must but please use a long string to pull the trigger on the first one and get it on video if you can. Gp

[Taylor]

Well..pooh

[megasupermagnum]

To be honest, I think you are over thinking the hull. It is a Federal plastic base, and it does not appear to be much different than all the other Federal plastic base hulls except the color. In the grand scheme of things, a tiny bit of variation here is not going to set the world on fire. Unless they were grossly different, I would gladly load those with Federal plastic base data myself.

The wads on the other hand are a problem. Shotguns, especially with shot, are far more dynamic than any handgun or rifle. The wad you use matters because #1 friction can be different, #2 the plastic hardness can be different, and #3 the cushion section (or lack of) can be different. There are more factors than that, but those are the big ones. The plastic hardness matters because when you fire, that shot sets back in the wad, not only to the bottom, but to the sides as well. A hard plastic wad will not allow shot to set back as much. The theory I subscribe to is that this lack of set back raises pressures because it effectively reduces the volume in the case before the shot itself starts moving forward. It is for this same reason that the cushion section matters. Now the textbook answer is to never swap any wad ever. Me personally, I don't get bent out of shape swapping very similar wads. For example, I have no problem swapping a Winchester AA12F114 with a Federal 12S4. They are so close, it doesn't really matter. I would not, however, swap a Federal 12S4 in place of a BPI TPS wad. They are totally different.

Primers are another area you have to be careful, but you have a Federal 209A in yours, so you won't be doing any swapping there. Again the textbook answer is to never swap primers. This is a much more gray area, but I do use CCI 209M data with Federal 209A primers. Do not use CCI 209 data, or any other primer data. Federal 209A primers are about the strongest, meaning they cause the highest chamber pressures of any primer, except a CCI 209M is usually very close.

Again, if you expect to see anything remotely close to your Winchester Longbeard ammo, when loading without buffer, you will be disappointed. Buffer is the key to getting tight patterns with lead shot. You also have to use buffer specific load data, as the pressure differences are huge, likely again due to the setback issue. On the other hand, if you are simply looking for a load that will kill a turkey to 35 maybe 40 yards, then by all means, go ahead without buffer. I'm kind of out of the turkey load shotshell game now, as I've embraced muzzleloading shotguns so much for turkeys. I don't use buffer, and I accept the limit in range. There is an alternate way of thinking that has a lot of merit, and that is the reduced recoil turkey load. A #7.5 shot is plenty lethal to a turkey in that limited range. You need a 1 3/4 oz or similar payload to get enough pellet count with #5 shot to be lethal at 35 or 40 yards. By going to a #7.5 shot, you are still lethal to 40 yards, but even with a 1 1/4 oz load, you have about 60% MORE pellets than 1 3/4 oz of #5. Generally a #5 will pattern tighter % wise, but not enough to overcome that great of a difference in pellet count. I do prefer #5 as the best choice for maximizing range with buffer. In a muzzleloader, I've come to really like #6 as a goldilocks for turkeys too.

I've been giving this some more thought myself, as I have a young hunter coming up who I hope to take out for turkeys next year. I could use a 20 gauge, but I think a light loaded 12 gauge single shot will be a better choice for me. He's still learning gun safety, and I like to be able to see the hammer and trigger