I screwed up... Now I need to pull down 47 shells.

[I'll Make Mine]

I've just started reloading 12 ga. a couple weeks ago. Got a Load All II, hulls, primers, wads, powder, shot, more hulls, different wads...

I bought a couple bags of Fiocchi new, unfired primed hulls, 2 3/4 low brass clear style (they were about the same price as once-fired plus primers, and save two steps on the press). I made up skeet loads from data I understood to have been pressure tested with Titegroup (normally a pistol powder, but there's a lot of overlap between pistol and shotgun powders). I had wads that were designed for Remington style hulls with their internal taper, and they drop free inside the Fiocchi hulls, so I tried a trick I saw on YouTube, loading a card under the plastic wad. I didn't have any nitro cards, however; I used plastic bingo chips that work great as overshot cards. I loaded fifty shells, anticipating a skeet fun shoot at a local club (and wanting to be sure I had enough shells).

Apparently the bingo chips neither seal well in the hull, nor expand the gas cup on the wad enough for it to seal. I fired one that felt a little soft (but it had been literally three years since I'd fired my 870); the next two were true bloopers, requiring a bore check to ensure there wasn't an obstruction.

Now I have 47 shells I need to pull down, and I'd strongly prefer not to cut off the crimp (which is the conventional method of breaking down a loaded shotshell), because it shortens the hull enough I won't be able to crimp them on my Load All II without making a riser and possibly modifying the crimp stations. I've gotten correct wads for these straight-wall hulls now, and I'd hate to have to throw away that many hulls or have to roll crimp over a shortened column.

I've thought about cutting the head off a #10 sheet metal or bugle head screw and chucking it in a drill, which will then drive the screw into the center of the crimp and get enough purchase to pull it up far enough to work open (with needle nose pliers and a small screwdriver) without undue effort or damage to the hull mouth.

Has anyone else done non-destructive unloading of 12 ga. shells?

[BLAHUT]

shoot them, check barrel after each round, that is the easiest way.

[I'll Make Mine]

shoot them, check barrel after each round, that is the easiest way.

Unfortunately, anywhere I could do this is more than an hour's drive away from home. Plus, that wastes the primers, powder, wads and shot.

It does eliminate shortening the hulls, though, so I'll consider it as an alternative if I don't find a way to pull them down without cutting. FWIW, at 15 cents for a primed hull, there's a limit to how much effort I'm willing to put in, but at 47 cents per loaded round, I'm willing to put in some effort to save the shot and hulls (which would cost about 10 cents a round as once-fired).

[Vopie]

You can open the crimp with a awl and needle nose pliers. But, a lot of work for low quality hull. I would cut 'em, save the primer, powder, wad and shot and find some once fired AA's or Rem. hulls. To bad you weren't closer, I'd give ya a couple bird boxes of Rem hulls. Got more than I'll use up in two life times.

[ascast]

I once made an inertia puller for some 16ga I had. 2x4 with correct size hole and a plastic peanut butter jar lid secured to the underside. It takes a good stout wack but does work. My cases were factory loads. They sat in a garage and got oil dripped all over them. They would not go bang.

[Winger Ed.]

As cheap as 12ga hulls are, I'd cut 'em above and below the shot cup.

Lay them on a flat table top and press down with a big knief as you roll them.
It'll go pretty fast.

[dverna]

You ignored the first rule in loading shotgun shells. Do not substitute components

You ignored the second rule. Do not depend on YouTube idiots.

The hulls are not worth salvaging. But you will ignore that advice.

[35 Rem]

I'd use something like the screw you mentioned or the awl somebody else described and gouge the crimp open 1 at a time. I've loaded many thousands of 12-gauge AA hulls that were worn out to the point that I had to put a small piece of paper on top of the shot to keep them from leaking. I'm cheap and hate throwing out a good shotshell hull in spite of having something like 2 cubic yards of them.

The idea of putting a relatively stiff card under a modern wad sounds strange to me. You want the cup to be free to open up under pressure so it can do it's job and seal the bore. If you need to add something to fill up space that should be done on top of the wad instead,

[15meter]

I've cut old shotgun hulls on a table saw, took a long chunk of wood, 12"x2"x3", drilled 4 holes near one end of it just big enough for the hulls to fit through and get caught by the rim. Insert 4 hulls, set the fence so you are cutting through the "crumple zone" of the hull with the rims against the fence. Run the block of wood part way through the saw, then pull back.

The two halves of the wad will pull out easily, saving the powder and shot. Push the primers out GENTLY and you can recycle them also.

Fine tooth SHARP blade in the saw.

Bandsaw would work also.

Remember this is free advice, worth every penny paid for it!

It worked for me, YMMV!!!!

[Minerat]

I think he put the chips under the wad to keep powder from leaking around the wad. Get one of these. I've used them to open the crimp to change shot sizes.

https://www.autozone.com/test-scan-a...ick/466527_0_0

[I'll Make Mine]

I think he put the chips under the wad to keep powder from leaking around the wad.

Correct. This apparently works with proper nitro card overpowder wads (as used in old style fiber wad loads or muzzleloading shotguns), but not so much with the bingo chips (which none the less work very well for overshot in place of the more costly pieces sold for this).

You ignored the first rule in loading shotgun shells. Do not substitute components

You ignored the second rule. Do not depend on YouTube idiots.

The hulls are not worth salvaging. But you will ignore that advice.

I started out following the advice in the instruction manual for the Load All II, which makes only one component distinction: plastic base wad and one-piece hulls, or paper base wad/paper hull. I wish they'd mentioned up front that those two hull types, also called "tapered" and "straight wall", need different wads even for the same column height vs. only different powder charges for the same velocity. And if I'd gotten straight-wall type wads in the first place, I might not have noticed this issue, at least not this soon, because most of those will apparently work in both kinds of hull.

And yes, I'll probably ignore the advice that hulls are not worth salvaging, though as noted in my OP, I'm not willing to spend much time saving them. If I do wind up cutting the crimps, I'll still have usable shortened hulls and I'll need to make up a riser for my press (and cut back the tube on at least the final crimp station), but an 870 is reported to reliably feed shells as short as 1 3/4 inches and these would wind up as 2 1/2 -- and I've even got loading data for 2 1/2 shells. At about a dime each to replace them with once-fired, however, the trimmed shells might wait a while until I can find or make a suitable shell riser.

I might note that we get that advice in the Hornady, Speer, etc. reloading manuals for metallic cartridges, too -- advice which is broadly ignored by using different bullets of the same or very similar weight, substituting cast for jacketed changing primers, and sometimes even using loads for (for instance) .38 Special in .357 Magnum cases (and back in the day, vice versa with bullets seated out). I would note that the YouTube information I've accepted is from long running shotshell reloading channels, and is duplicated from more than one source.

Where I screwed up was in not using the correct kind of remedy (bingo chip vs. proper nitro card), because there wasn't time to wait for shipping (and I didn't yet know about what seems to be the one decent local source of components, a ten minute detour from my normal route home from work). I also screwed up long ago by moving to a place "in the country" that is none the less more than an hour from anywhere I can shoot a shotgun, even to test a couple rounds, without knowing the land owners and getting appropriate written permission.

[MrWolf]

Correct. This apparently works with proper nitro card overpowder wads (as used in old style fiber wad loads or muzzleloading shotguns), but not so much with the bingo chips (which none the less work very well for overshot in place of the more costly pieces sold for this).



I started out following the advice in the instruction manual for the Load All II, which makes only one component distinction: plastic base wad and one-piece hulls, or paper base wad/paper hull. I wish they'd mentioned up front that those two hull types, also called "tapered" and "straight wall", need different wads even for the same column height vs. only different powder charges for the same velocity. And if I'd gotten straight-wall type wads in the first place, I might not have noticed this issue, at least not this soon, because most of those will apparently work in both kinds of hull.

And yes, I'll probably ignore the advice that hulls are not worth salvaging, though as noted in my OP, I'm not willing to spend much time saving them. If I do wind up cutting the crimps, I'll still have usable shortened hulls and I'll need to make up a riser for my press (and cut back the tube on at least the final crimp station), but an 870 is reported to reliably feed shells as short as 1 3/4 inches and these would wind up as 2 1/2 -- and I've even got loading data for 2 1/2 shells. At about a dime each to replace them with once-fired, however, the trimmed shells might wait a while until I can find or make a suitable shell riser.

I might note that we get that advice in the Hornady, Speer, etc. reloading manuals for metallic cartridges, too -- advice which is broadly ignored by using different bullets of the same or very similar weight, substituting cast for jacketed changing primers, and sometimes even using loads for (for instance) .38 Special in .357 Magnum cases (and back in the day, vice versa with bullets seated out). I would note that the YouTube information I've accepted is from long running shotshell reloading channels, and is duplicated from more than one source.

Where I screwed up was in not using the correct kind of remedy (bingo chip vs. proper nitro card), because there wasn't time to wait for shipping (and I didn't yet know about what seems to be the one decent local source of components, a ten minute detour from my normal route home from work). I also screwed up long ago by moving to a place "in the country" that is none the less more than an hour from anywhere I can shoot a shotgun, even to test a couple rounds, without knowing the land owners and getting appropriate written permission.

Lot of learning from experience right there. We all make mistakes and luckily yours did not hurt anyone except you financially and not that bad. Best advice is cut the hulls and salvage the powder and primers and use them as they were intended. I used Remington hulls and proper wars and never had an issue. Good luck.
Ron

[JimB..]

You must be in Cary or Chapel Hill. Either way, the 4th of July is only a month away and it’ll provide sufficient cover if you want to fire them in the back yard.

[longbow]

If you plan on saving the hulls you can make a simple inertia puller as ascast says in post #5.

I have used 3/4" pipe for hull gauges when I trim hulls and I have used the same pipe to unload slug rounds successfully. 12 ga. hulls just slide in then a few whacks on a block of wood will open the crimp. I just used a short pipe nipple about an inch longer than the hull and in my hand. If you can weld a hand on that would be even better. In any case, a few whacks and the crimp opened. With shot I suspect the crimp will just open until the shot runs out but then you can use a screwdriver, awl or whatever to open it up further then pull the wad out with pliers.

Is it worth the work? Only you can answer that. I don't like to waste stuff so I'll spend some time to save what I can if the method isn't to onerous and there is enough benefit.

Longbow

[dverna]

http://www.armbrust.acf2.org/primersubs.htm

In the above article, Table 1 shows changing primers varied pressure by 2000 psi.

Table 2, shows a LPU difference of over 3000 units by changing primers but with a different powder that burns slower.

Changing wads and crimp integrity will affect pressure as well.

Shotgun chambers are essentially thin wall pressure vessels with a maximum rating of 11,500 psi for 2 3/4" and 3" 12 ga chambers. There is very little "wiggle room" to work with...unlike what we have with rifle cartridges. And there is no way to "see signs of excess pressure" in a shotshell until you have gone over the maximum pressure by a lot.

A cursory look at reloading data shows how different wads in different hulls impact pressure.

Experienced reloaders might be able to safely make component substitutions but not many fall into that subset of reloaders. Most folks going "off the reservation" are hacks IMO.

I understand with current shortages and costs, it is tempting to "try something" either to save money or just be able to shoot at all. But shotguns are not forgiving. If someone must use a component combination that is not a published recipe (and by that, I mean published by a powder or wad manufacturer...not some guy posting on a forum or YouTube) find a load that is running in the 8000-8500 PSI range so there is some wiggle room.

After more than 200k reloads my pick for hulls are STS's, Peters (same as STS's), Gun Clubs and AA's. They may cost a bit more, but you get more reloads out of them and there are many more of recipes for them.

I checked the Hodgdon site. There are 28 loads for Titegroup in STS hulls, 29 loads for AA hulls and none for Fiocchi hulls. There may be a good reason the manufacturer did not test Titegroup in Fiocchi hulls and it may be worth contacting them to see what they say.

[longbow]

To further what Don is saying about substitutions, in my earlier years relaoding for slugs I made a serious mistake in using a Lyman Shotshell Reloading manual recipe but shortened the hull and cut the cushion leg off the wads. I was emulkating what a friend did with trap load and round ball in a shortened hull though he had no obvious issues with that load.

I wanted a shorter hull and couldn't see the harm if the powder charge and all else was the same. Well, I was wrong! To make matters worse, I ignored pretty serious recoil in my Browning BPS and sticking hulls at ejection. I figured it was a "book load" except it wasn't quite. Whern I dropped one of those same loads in my single shot the top of chamber parted company with the rest of the barrel! The entire top of the chamber blew off and I got a blast of gas and small bits of shrapnel in the forehead. Fortunately I just had some minor cuts and lost some hearing in my right ear... I was in the bush so not wearing ear protection, which I should have been.

What happened is that the Lyman Foster slug had a filled cavity and the slug swole up to fill the chamber from about a 2 1/2" hull in a 3" chamber then met the forcing cone and I am guessing between higher pressure due to no cushion leg plus an oversize filled slug the pressure spiked and the chamber (effectively an overlength chamber) failed due to over pressure.

I kept the gun for show and tell for quite a while but I tossed it when we had to move up North for work so I don't have it anymore. The chamber showed lead from the short hull to the forcing cone so I am pretty sure my analysis is correct... high pressure at ignition because no cushion leg, filled slug obturating to fill the chamber then meeting the forcing cone and having to squeeze down.

I have posted details on this site two or three times before to try to help someone else avoid a similar situation.

Since, it seems to have become fairly common knowledge that if you substitute a wad it should be with a simiar wad and cushion leg. Pressure can increase dramatically due to less volume at ignition.

Something else to look at in the link Don posted is crimp depth. A deep crimp can increase pressure as much as a change to a hot primer!

So, a couple of seemingly small changes can affect pressure by quite a bit!

Play but play safe!

Longbow

[gwpercle]

You ignored the first rule in loading shotgun shells. Do not substitute components

You ignored the second rule. Do not depend on YouTube idiots.

The hulls are not worth salvaging. But you will ignore that advice.

LIKE !

And you will ignore Rule# 3 .
Never load up a quantity of any untested load be it rifle , pistol or shotgun ...
Test Em first to make sure they work !

My favorite rule is #2 ... avoid the U-Tube idiot-experts advice ...
Gary

[Hogtamer]

Are you sure it’s not Titewad instead of Titegroup powder?.

[Cap'n Morgan]

Are you sure it’s not Titewad instead of Titegroup powder?.

That's what I was thinking, but Tightwad is an even faster burning powder than Tightgroup (which is still at the fast end of powders). The bloopers were probably caused by space between powder & wad.

I've noticed that there's hardly any internal base left in modern, cheap shells. No doubt as a way to save money on materials. I'm shooting Italian NSI shells (steel shot) at the moment, and if you examine a fired hull, you can actually see a slight expansion of the "brass" head where the extractor is located.

[I'll Make Mine]

http://www.armbrust.acf2.org/primersubs.htmfind a load that is running in the 8000-8500 PSI range so there is some wiggle room.
<snip>
I checked the Hodgdon site. There are 28 loads for Titegroup in STS hulls, 29 loads for AA hulls and none for Fiocchi hulls. There may be a good reason the manufacturer did not test Titegroup in Fiocchi hulls and it may be worth contacting them to see what they say.

I did in fact select loads that had been pressure tested and were under 9000 psi. This is for skeet/trap, there are restrictions at the range I was visiting (7 1/2 max shot size, 1 1/8 ounce max payload, 1250 ft/s max velocity), and I was trying to be compliant (reclaimed shot isn't sorted by size, but coming from skeet/trap ranges ought to be almost exclusively 7 1/2, 8, and 9). BTW, I found I can get new #8 for only about $4 more per bag, so I'll do that in future and not have to think about that.

Never load up a quantity of any untested load be it rifle , pistol or shotgun ...

Yep, guilty, and as long as I've been loading for handguns I should have known better (around 1982, had to shoot a box of .357 loaded with .38 Special data with the barrel unscrewed from my Dan Wesson; too little powder in the larger case for attempted light plinking loads to get the bullets past the forcing cone). Mind you, this makes reloading even more complicated for those who don't live near a range or can't shoot on a weekly or better basis.

That's what I was thinking, but Tightwad is an even faster burning powder than Tightgroup (which is still at the fast end of powders). The bloopers were probably caused by space between powder & wad.

Titegroup, according to a current burn rate chart, is between Green Dot and Bullseye for burn rate -- both of which are regularly used in shotgun loads. It's only three positions slower than 700-X (which is the other powder I have on hand). Every load I've been able to find that lists both 700-X and Titegroup shows within 0.2 grain of the same weight in the same hull/wad combination.

Titegroup is denser, however; it's almost unusable with the stock Load All II bushings. I've got a set of 3D printed bushings in .090, .085, .080, and .075, set up a spreadsheet to calculate how much each would drop from a load density table which I verified by checking the loads for known bushing/powder combinations, and landed on the .085 bushing to drop 16.4 grains (which is 0.1 grain more than I'd used with 700-X on my previous load setup).

There's no empty space in these loads; the Fiocchhi hulls are clear, and I can see that the bingo chip is seated hard down on the powder, the wad very slightly compressed by the crimp, and only a few granules of powder in the wad on any shell (generally the ones where it took me two or three tries to get the bingo chip to go in straight). HOWEVER, the bingo chip still isn't "gas seal" snug in the hull, nor is the wad base (which is why I used the bingo chips in the first place), which I think is the main issue -- I've got blowby; this (based on my understanding of how this stuff works) prevents pressure from rising as it normally would, and keeps the powder burning slower than it should.

If I get a good seal (and I will with the new bag of wads), I'm replicating loads I found from Hodgdon for 700-X with Cheddite primers (with very slightly slower powder and the Fiocchi primers a little less powerful than Cheddite) in Estate white box hulls, which by examintion have identical construction to these Fiocchi (straight wall, low profile plastic base wad -- apparently Estate hulls were made by Fiocchi at times). Every variation here -- slower powder, lighter primer -- ought to reduce pressure. I believe the main reason Hodgdon doesn't currently publish skeet type loads for Titegroup in 12 ga. is that the volume of a charge is so low most presses can't drop it with their stock bushings -- obviously easily overcome by using a separate powder measure/scale, if you don't have custom bushings.

I'll be going by Lowe's today, I'll take along a fired hull for fit and get some pipe parts and build a puller (not a bad thing to have, I've got a kinetic puller that I was using to disassemble .32 S&W to refill with black powder substitute, but obviously that won't accept 12 ga.), ought to be able to do that for around five bucks. I'm willing to pay that to save $7.50 worth of hulls and close to $14 worth of shot (never mind the powder and wads, they're cheap by comparison).