Printable View
Im using a published load from BPI Load #151016-7365
,
https://www.ballisticproducts.com/load15_11_20.htm
,
to try and work on my stickie high wall hull problem,
1- How many grains can I lower the load to see if it quits sticking in my chamber
(as someone mentioned I have an over pressure problem with my AQ loads)
and yes I would check chamber for wads not exiting the barrel before the next round
can I step down from 30gn to 29gn, 29gn to 28gn and so on?
untill i un-stickie or squib ?
In my limited experience, you can reduce charges with fast powders by quite a bit and still get a good result. Slow powders like Blue Dot, not so much.
Something you can check is birdshot load recipes. It is safe and sane to substitute equal weight payload using your buckshot into a recipe calling for birdshot. Buckshot and slug recipes tend to be higher velocity and often higher pressure than birdshot loads.
Some manuals list several different powder charges for a given set of components along with velocities and pressures from low to high. Reloading for Shotgunners is a manual I like for that.
There are also some subsonic loads listed that may be suitable for your use. Metro Gun Systems lists these:
https://www.metrogun.com/handloads.html
and Slus R Us lists one subsonic load using Green Dot:
http://slugsrus.com/Load-Data-12GA.html
To note though is that this is for a slug load and slug loads generally produce less pressure for payload weight due to lower bore friction than shot. However, being a reduced load a quick check with birdshot loads should tell you if the powder charge is lighter than for equivalent weight birdshot loads.
Non of the loads listed in that BPI data are particularly high pressure. The highest pressure I saw was 9600 PSI and many were in the 8000 PSI range. So maybe high pressure isn't the problem. If you are loading exactly to the recipe over pressure should not be the problem. Ajay has noted that Fiocchi hulls tend to be "softer" than other hulls and produce more head expansion which could lead to sticky extraction. I have not experienced sticky extraction with Fiocchi hulls in my loading but as you've mentioned, possibly rough chambers plus more head expansion could do it?
BPI may be able to advise as well. In the past i have contacted then and they have been very helpful.
Longbow
There is a lot to this question, the usual answer is 10%. A max of 30 grains you could go down to 27 grains. You can work downwards as you say too. You have to go quite a ways to actually stick a wad in the barrel. Long before that you will start to get poor ignition, best seen over a chronograph.
In your case, you can work downward until the shells extract. It will allow you to shoot, but it may not be ideal. I see BPI has Federal 2 3/4" hulls for sale at $16 per hundred, both clear and red hulls available. Those are the ones to buy, they will cure all of your problems.
Shhhhh,, dont tell, EVERYBODY,,dabnabbit :) im hoping santa will bring me those for Xmass and my BirthdayQuote:
Originally Posted by megasupermagnum
as im fricken Broke till January :) from filling stockings already
( thanks)
John
You can certainly work down a bit at a time until you get a blooper then go back up in powder charge until you don't get bloopers but it is likely better to use a recipe that has been tested and "works" like subsonic loads, reduced load data of which there is a bit around or low pressure load data for old shotguns which there is quite a bit of.
That and a change of hulls may solve things for you.
If Santa brings you some federal hulls you may be good to go with no other changes! Since you said you like light load data though there are recipes around. I have some reduced load data I can share if you let me know what components you have or can get. I'll have to dig through old bookmarks but there is a shotgun site that has a bunch of loads for BP shotguns so BP pressure equivalent loads. These might be just what you are looking for.
Wait... here is one site with info for old guns but fairly light payloads:
https://www.nssa-nsca.org/wp-content...10/ceretto.pdf
and Parker guns has a bunch of low pressure load data if you search:
http://parkerguns.org/forums/archive....php/f-21.html
http://parkerguns.org/forums/archive....php/t-14.html
Hmmm... generally light payloads though so maybe no good for your buckshot loads.
Probably not much help. But I tried!
Longbow
ok, with what your saying,Quote:
Originally Posted by longbow
off Hodgdons website
for birdshot 12 Ga.
1 ozLead shot
STS hull 2 1/2 inches (I can cut down my 2 3/4)
Universal powder 20.8 Gn
win 209 primer
WAA12R wad
7300 PSI
1180 FPS
1oz=437.5
21 #4 Buck =434.1 average --Hornady
8 00 buck= 425.2 average--Hornady
Im under weight with the load,
Hodgdon doesnt say crimp or roll
at 7300 PSI can I roll crimp this and still be safe?
and have STS green buck loads that by looks and feel would tell me because of the smaller length/size
Hodgdon isnt very forthcoming with any buck loads,
Ive got one i use with HS-6 and 2 3/4 STS
LOL now youve got me wanting to get my old,old underlever out :)Quote:
Originally Posted by longbow
Fired a 25gn Longshot load out of the Chedittes with #4 buck, roll crimped,
did not stick, in the itaca, wad flew, sounded like my BP rifles, more boom than crack,
but it did take out one of my pickets in my fence, 20 paces away :) gotta fix that before the wife gets home :(
and its dang cold out
That's great. Likely the boom is simply because you are sub-sonic, which is ballpark 1125 fps. Now just to see how it patterns.Quote:
Originally Posted by 49FMarlin
Roll or fold crimp? Good question!
I was always under the impression that a roll crimp developed more pressure during the crimp opening than a fold crimp and the BPI info says something about roll crimp giving more complete "cyclic" burn than fold crimp which indicates to me that it is harder to open a roll crimp so somewhat more pressure required (like a tight, consistent crimp for boolits in brass cartridges).
However, there has been other info posted about fold crimps developing more pressure than roll crimps. And to add to it apparently a deeper fold crimp than "normal" (?) can increase pressure significantly. For those of us without pressure testing equipment this can be confusing to say the least. I guess a good question is "How much pressure does it take to open the two different styles of crimp? And if deeper than "normal"? If the answer is that it is a fraction of peak pressure and doesn't raise peak pressure then who cares? As long as the crimp is consistent and you get good ignition I suspect it doesn't matter but that is just my opinion.
To follow up on downloading, I have had two instances where I have had incomplete or inconsistent powder ignition/burn Both either lighter payload or lower than normal powder charge:
- 1st was a slug load using 1 oz. slug and Blue Dot but relatively light load of 36 grs. IIRC. I got inconsistent "booms" and quite a bit of unburned powder in the bore.
- 2nd was recently when I took out my Lee 7/8 oz. slug loads to try. I used load data for a 1 oz. slug using Unique figuring it was fast enough that it would work with the lighter payload (didn't want to use up my limited supply of Green Dot). Wrong! I had some very inconsistent shots with noticeably less recoil and much different sound, and a couple that obviously just about didn't make it out the bore. In the past I have found Unique to be very flexible and dependable but I guess the payload was just too light so not enough pressure for good ignition or complete burn. Next time I used a Green Dot load for 7/8 oz. and no problems.
No experience here with Longshot so can't help there but it appears it worked for you anyway.
Once again, not a lot of help... but I am trying.
Longbow
If you've been around here for long you will have seen many posts on reducing loads for Rifles Pistols and Shotguns.
There's three major concerns when down loading anything
1. Is there enough pressure generated by the load to make the powder burn completely and cleanly.
2. Is there any space left between the charge and boolit or wad base.
3. Will the reduced load clear the muzzle and not stick in the barrel. This is where you need to pay attention!
With #1 there are no negative consequences beyond a dirty bore and poor performance.
With #2 there are some negative consequences. The biggest of which is the dreaded "Flashover." Flashover occurs and is most dangerous in large cartridges where when the gun is held horizontally or muzzle slightly down, the charge lays flat on the bottom of the shell and the flash hole is exposed to the side of the entire charge. Thus during firing, the primer ignites the entire side of the charge which is considerably larger than the end of the charge and thus the entire charge burns much faster than it would if burning end to end, and as a result the pressure spikes dramatically.
We have all heard of not reducing a charge of H110 below the minimum charge. The reason for this is below that there is a possibility of the side of the charge being exposed to the flash which will cause that Relatively Slow Burning Powder to burn much quicker thus Spiking Pressure.
To visualize this further, look at the charge burning end to end versus burning side to side. Easy to see burning side to side will happen much quicker. Thus the pressure will reach its peak much faster. So with a charge designed to burn at a certain rate and generate a specific pressure curve, (which usually will be associated with a Max or near Max Load,) altering that pressure curve by burning a smaller charge faster can have a negative effect on you and your gun.
However if that smaller charge is fully contained so that it will in fact burn end to end, then all that will happen is lower pressure associated with the lower amount of powder burned, and the same relative burn rate as would be expected in any other quantity.
With metallic cartridges you are always looking at the highest load density IE: case filled to the max, as the most efficient load for that cartridge.
With a black powder gun if you don't seat the bullet hard against the charge you get a slightly delayed ignition, and a "chicka boom" instead of a "boom."
However with shotgun shells you can cram the wad down on top of the charge eliminating any air space in the charge. So the final criteria ends up being,,, Will the payload clear the muzzle or stick in the barrel. So you kind of need to pay attention when testing your light loads.
We all know the back side of sticking a wad in the barrel and then firing the next round.
So you kind of need to pay attention when testing your light loads.
Randy
Pm sent.
could just be extraction issues cheddite brass rims are round off more than us hulls
have a 410 that extracts AA perfect and wont pull out a cheddite hull
49FMarlin, your wads and hulls should be there Friday!!! Merry Christmas to you!
thank you sir, and god bless you and yoursQuote:
Originally Posted by budzilla 19
Last year I did some experiments on this very subject with 7/8 oz lee slugs stuffed into cut-open winchester target loads. I cut the crimps off a whole box of shells, weighed the powder charges, and found an average of 14.3 grains. Then I reduced the powder a half grain at a time, re-inserted the wads, and roll crimped my lee slugs into the now slightly shorter hulls with a little CoW to get a decent crimp height. In MY gun, 5.5 grains gave the lowest powder charge that would burn consistently, 8 grains shot VERY consistently, and at 10.5 grains, I started to crack the sound barrier.
Interestingly enough, in a 18" cylinder bore barrel, with the slug spaced out to the very end of the wad petals, and no powder at all, the primer would still push the whole payload out the barrel with a hilarious sounding "BLOOP". I can throw them harder by hand. For safety's sake, the first ladder tests were fired remotely with a string. I have no clue what powder winchester uses, so insert standard disclaimer as necessary.
I don't believe those Longshot loads could possibly be under 8,000 psi with nearly a 1-3/8 oz payload. Similar loads on hodgdons site are running over 11,000.Quote:
Originally Posted by 49FMarlin
and ive quit loading them,Quote:
Originally Posted by wildflilghts
I dont trust it, but ive never heard of BPI giving bad data
wish i could find other data for it
or im gonna just give up and wave the wite flag
One of the biggest problems I see with Longshot is that it is misrepresented as a slow powder. Too many burn charts put it even slower than Bluedot! This is a burn chart I trust, and seems accurate. https://www.1967spud.com/wp-content/...rate-chart.png
Instead these guys put Longshot between 800x and HS-6, which seems correct to me. This is made even more clear when you compare handgun load data. Longshot data never even comes close to bluedot in a handgun.
Longshot is a medium burn rate powder that seems to burn longer to allow high velocities. In that sense it does exactly what it was designed for. Relatively light shotgun payloads at high velocities. This makes it a good powder for high velocity slugs too. I've never pressure tested Longshot, but I would bet it maintains pressure to the muzzle longer compared to older powders like 800x. This is why we call it Loudshot, it really does boom.
What Longshot is not, is a slow burning powder for heavy shotgun shells. 1 3/8 oz is fine, but where guys get into trouble is trying to make turkey loads with the stuff. I see no reason to doubt BPI. What they have posted is very different from the lead shot data Hodgdon has.
I don't think it's a pressure problem. The 3 1/2 12 gauge SAAMI pressure is 18% greater than standard 12 gauge pressures. Case bases are the same yet no sticking problems
Rough chamber is what I would look at.
These work well to resolve that.
https://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-t...--prod647.aspx
https://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-t...930-20135.aspx
https://www.shotgunlife.com/shotguns...pressures.html
There have been several cases of BPI pressures being off on shotgunworld.com and duckhuntingchat.comQuote:
Originally Posted by 49FMarlin
I don't remember all of the reloaders that have had loads tested but derbyacresbob is one that had multiple loads sent out for testing that came back over pressure. There are others that would put their hands up if someone cared to ask. They aren't all Longshot loads either.
Longshot has a high nitroglycerine content. It works well for a lot of applications but when it goes over pressure, it goes quickly.
The bases and general construction of the hulls are same for both lengths on the ones that I have cut apart. This fact does indict that the hull construction verse pressure is not the source of the sticking. Reducing the pressure may mask the problem but the problem is still there.Quote:
Originally Posted by wildflilghts
3-1/2" guns are rated for higher pressures. It does not matter that the general hull construction is similar minus the length of the tube.Quote:
Originally Posted by M-Tecs
Without that added pressure, a 3-1/2" 12 bore couldn't pretend to almost match a big 10.
M-Tecs is correct, but if the reduced loads fix the problem and work well, I'd take it.
If it was a rough chamber, it wouldn't be the only load that causes sticking issues.
49FMarlin has had problems with most loads in his gun. The very soft Fiocchi hulls aren't helping, but I'm sure his chamber is rough.Quote:
Originally Posted by wildflilghts
I am only having problem with sticking when I use the fiotchi or cheddite hulls
any of my brass "real brass hulls" do not stick, tall or short brass-- they fall out of my SXS and cycle out of my Ithica
the cheds and Fio's stick and have to cool to cycle, and come out
if i force it then I get torn up casings on the rim
using an AA hull and a Ched hull
loaded up a birdshot load in each,
ched sticks
AA cycles