Author |
Message |
< 16ga. Ammunition & Reloading ~ Reloadability |
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:59 am
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 118
Location: N.Y.
|
|
That might be for the best, Charlie..
It sounds like they're dangerous! On second thought, I'll just take my chances and shoot 'em up... This face never was much to look at anyway.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:49 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 160
Location: central oregon
|
|
Keep in mind any warning from a firearms or component manufacturer should be preceded by .....
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
LAWYER TALK FOLLOWS. ALL YOU WHO DISREGARD THIS WARNING HAVE NOW ASSUMED YOUR OWN LIABILITY.
WARNING ENDS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:51 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 6535
Location: massachusetts
|
|
This is a simple one really. Federal paper based hulls are an excellent hull to reload if you follow the well known safety guidelines for the hull type. Keep them absolutely bone dry and load them no more than one or two times depending on the load. I've used them and I like them--for one and possibly two reloadings.
Could they concievably last more than 2 reloadings? Probably. Could any of them fail after one or two reloadings? It is a distinct possibility. There are a number of by now well know reasons why. Rehashing those reasons at this point will do nobody any good. It is just simpler and safer to heed the warning.
Simple. I like simple. In this case, simple is safe. Ben Amonette of Alliant has told me so. He is a munitions professional who works for the parent company. I believe he knows about this matter better than myself or anyone else who posts on this site.
Now, are we there yet? Maybe.
"GOOD GRIEF!!!" from Charlie Brown in Peanuts. |
Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:08 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:07 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Posts: 1338
|
|
|
Last edited by mike campbell on Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:10 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 6535
Location: massachusetts
|
|
*** |
Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Mon May 11, 2009 4:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:37 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Posts: 1338
|
|
|
Last edited by mike campbell on Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:46 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 6535
Location: massachusetts
|
|
Thanks for an honest and civil reply Mike. I appreciate it. I've had several new shells of differnt makes split or have a split rim. I once had a new Remington .410 blow the entire front part out the bore like a long slug. I think this is referred to as a whistler. In every case, there was no ejecta remaining in the bore.
One the other hand, I've witnessed the results of a bore obstruction resulting from firing a reloaded 12 ga Federal All Sport hull. The hull used in these promotional loads is identical to the present Federal 16 ga hull in all respects except for size. The ruined gun was a K-80. The load in question broke the target and a couple of folks on the line said the wad came out as well. So we were left to assume something else was lodged in the bore. The shooter was an older guy known to be a total miser and would reload any hull he used until it was falling to pieces. I was also very careful to never shoot next to this guy on any line of trap. I avoided him like a dose of the clap in this matter. So did several other of the regulars. Even so, nobody knew for sure how many times the hull had been loaded either. The shooter claimed it was a fairly new hull. I still have my doubts about that.
Luckily for the rest of the line, the only one hurt was the shooter. He lost a very expensive, well made gun, and got his forend hand and arm ripped up a bit. I suppose it could have been much worse. The sad part is it did not have to happen IMO. A bit of prudence most likely would have prevented it. Just my opinion.
Anyway, I think we are there now. I am anyway. If anyone wants to now rip me a new butt hole for posting my opinion, please have the common decency to use the PM. I promise to at least read the first one from anyone. i might flush the rest though. No telling here. Thanks for listening. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:26 pm
|
|
|
|
Black&Tan wrote: |
Jeeeesh,
I have loaded a few shells, just a few, over the years..
I'm not concerned about basewad seperation or what I would need to do to make one seperate..
Just interested in which hull crimps the best, and I can take the farthest..
Thanks for all the replies.
|
B&T all three are capable of and will give good crimps if the wad/shot column is of the proper height and the crimp start and final crimp dies are adjusted properly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Fri May 01, 2009 11:48 am
|
|
|
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 830
Location: Adirondak Mtns
|
|
If hull with a paper or any other base wad should only be reloaded 1 or 2 times means you need more Hulls. Good marketing maybe? Be it Federal, BP or who ever I always take a look down the barrel between shots.
js |
_________________ Interested in older US made SxS and upland hunting. New to reloading shot shells and looking for info and advice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Fri May 01, 2009 12:48 pm
|
|
|
|
Marketing ploy or not this whole thing with base wad seperation is an old saw carried over from the days when manufacturers all used paper base wads and paper hulls for that matter. Federal has a good product that is durable as any. However, checking down the barrel for obstructions irregardless of what the base wad material is made of is a good habit and would probably saved a few barrels from bursting due to obstructions in the bore such a 20 gauge rounds in the barrels of 12 gauge guns or snow and mud packed into the muzzle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Sat May 02, 2009 5:01 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 1008
Location: Sandy Lake, PA
|
|
16gaugeguy wrote: |
HUUUUUHHH!!! Alliant developes and manufactures all kinds of munitions and weapons and has at least one and probably several of the biggest and best staffed ballistics labs in the nation--right? Federal Cartridge is a division of Alliant--right? Same company, two related operations--right?
|
This might be a small nit to pick, but to be factual a correction is in order.
Federal Cartridge and Alliant Techsystems are both part of the network of companies under the ATK Commercial Products umbrella...the folks who run the Lake City Armament plant. One doesn't own the other...they are equals, just like the other companies of ATK--Speer, RCBS, CCI, etc.
http://www.alliantpowder.com/general/links.aspx |
_________________ ------------
Davy 03C&R FFL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Sat May 02, 2009 6:21 am
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 1975
|
|
I emailed Federal trying to get an answer on reloading the hulls with the paper basewad. This is the answer I got.
[img]
[/img]
Apparently they see no problem reloading their hulls.
It's in JPEG format. You can click on it to see a larger version, also you can save it as a picture if wanted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted:
Sat May 23, 2009 1:40 am
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 50
Location: New Jersey
|
|
I have not experienced paper base separations in the 16 ga. Federal hull yet, but have experienced such in Federal's 20 ga. case. The base never entered the bore, but I noticed the base loose in the case on a couple of occasions during my inspection prior to reloading. Yes, I had reloaded them more than twice already. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|