16ga.com Forum Index
Author Message
<  16ga. Ammunition & Reloading  ~  Does Anything Matter Anymore With 16ga Reloads?
Brewster11
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2022 10:04 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1301
Location: Western WA

If I’m not mistaken, many of us 16ga reloaders are limping along with whatever powders and components we can scratch and scrape up. Gone are the days when our shelves were generously filled with reloading supplies organized with military discipline.

Our supplies are now a motley collection of leftovers and grab bag sales items.

And what about our reloads? Are we still fixated on a special favored recipe or two that were carefully composed and tested with scientific precision? Hardly.

We can barely crank out a few boxes before the carefully prescribed ingredients start to dwindle.

But does it really matter anymore? Maybe not.

What if we simply cooked up a load with whatever ingredients we had available, matched as closely as possible to a similar published load at around 1200 fps. Then we clocked it at the range to make sure it was at or below 1200. Maybe the powder is different. Or the primers, or wads, or everything, but the velocity is 1200 fps. Would anything bad happen?

I believe the answer is absolutely not. Yes, the patterns might suffer a bit. Or the velocity might be a bit lame. But will the barrel burst, or make a bulge or ring, or the lugs loosen? If the gun is a healthy modern firearm, I believe no harm at all will happen at 1200 fps with any mix of components.

So maybe in this day and time, all those painstaking measures which we took in the past are merely superfluous now. Pressure test every new load? Not if we have to hatch a new load every few weeks.

Maybe nothing really matters any more with reloads, because it can’t. As long as the crimp holds in the shot, and the shell fits in the chamber, and the shot leaves the muzzle at 1200 FPS, why not just shoot it?

After all, isn’t that pretty much all they did 120 years ago when today’s 16ga was invented?

V/R
B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hammer bill
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 5:51 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 815

That's basically the way I started out several years ago. Being that the 16 is so close to the12ga the difference is very little between the two. In a 12ga hull & a 20ga hull I measured the volume by weight with water and by pressure of a load between the two. Tried to stay as close to 1200 as I could. I would chronograph the load and was very surprised how close I would be at times. I have a westernfield that's built like a tank I use for my experiment loads. There are times you can tell by recoil something ain't right. To my knowledge I have not come close of blowing the gun up. Many loads have eventually become published to what I was using which I have been very pleased. That's the way I had to do it starting back in the late 60's and on. I'd scrounge to get any powder I could get with what little money I had. I still find myself doing this from time to time. Bill
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MSM2019
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 6:31 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2019
Posts: 1819
Location: Central ND

I completely understand the predicament, but........

Messing around with 3/4 and 7/8 oz. loads is probably OK and it would be difficult to get into trouble.

1 oz. loads using typical 12 gauge target powders and trying to get 1200 FPS can easily be over the SAAMI MAP of 11,500 PSI. 1 1/8 and heavier loads shouldn't even be in this conversation.

Here is the problem, when you start taking chances, the chances tend to get larger and larger until something goes terribly wrong.

There are a lot of older firearms that folks use here. Are they all in great repair?

Extrapolating data is bad business.

There is no linear relationship between velocity and chamber pressure.

What you can do is stop worrying about using different straight wall hulls. 2 3/4" Federal paper basewad hulls, Cheddites, RIO's, Fiocchi's etc are all essentially the same. You can load these with 3/4 oz. up through 1 1/8 oz. using a tested load with little concern. The exception to this would be using the Remington hulls, as they have a smaller I.D. and create higher chamber pressures. The other exceptions would be Steel and TSS loads.

What is not a good idea is to swap more than one component in the data. Like subbing a Cheddite primer for a Winchester 209 and swapping a Gualandi SG16 for an SP16 wad. You can easily increase the chamber pressure 3,000 PSI with that combination using some powders.

Unless you really understand what you are swapping this is a bad road to travel.

That is of course only my opinion. Many folks are happy with a load that goes bang......YMMV

_________________
Mark...You are entitled to your own opinion. You aren't entitled to your own facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brewster11
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 7:14 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1301
Location: Western WA

Agree Mark, my remarks should be confined to 1 oz and below. A search of published loads show all powders, including Red Dot, generally regarded as the hottest powder, producing acceptable pressures at 1200. Some disagreement is found among the pubs however, but nothing alarming.

Yes, straightwall hulls with the exception of Rem should be the norm here, but that really covers everything because tapered wall hulls have become collectors relics.

The problem with tested loads is they simply don’t exist for the vast preponderance of loads we have.

But my point is we MUST swap components because we have no choice now. And if an extra 3000 psi might be a problem, don’t shoot the gun. Our modern guns can handle that comfortably.

B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Charlie16ga
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:21 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 28 Aug 2014
Posts: 924
Location: Eastern Tennessee

Totally didn't horde, powder, wads, and primers 7 years ago.

Only wish I would have added shot to that list.

I acquired a lifetime supply of Remington SP16, Cheddite 1628, and VP80. Planning to do the same on the next run of DR16's. Feel like CB100, CB78, SG16, and Z16 are not going anywhere (even though I have several bags of each of them as well).

My bricks of primers are flush with Win209, Ched209, Rem 57, and the old Fed209.

_________________
16' Brown A5
15' Brown White Light Citori
13' Brown Upland Spcl BPS
02' Rem 870 Exp
53' Rem 870 Wing
53' Mar 90 DT
50' Mar 90 DT
47' Rem 31L
46' Win 12 (2)
33' Rem 31
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grahamshewell
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 11:33 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 14 Oct 2011
Posts: 61
Location: England

If you look at European reloading data then you will get a gauge, primer strength, powder weigh, plastic or fibre wad then crimp or roll on the data.
No wads are ever listed as the data is all for straight wall wads and it is a matter of what fits best.
http://www.gualandi.it/docs/tabpolv_2013_eng.pdf
This is European data from Gualandi
Regards
Graham
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MSM2019
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 12:08 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2019
Posts: 1819
Location: Central ND

As long as you use a Gualandi, B & P and Fiocchi style wad that works.

If you are using the euro style wads in place of an R16 or an SP16 in a straight wall hull that is a bad swap. The euro style wads build a lot more pressure (as in 2000+ PSI) in those hulls than the Remington wads will.

You need to carefully consider some of the swaps.

IMHO, this thread has the potential to do more harm than good.

Just because components are in short supply shouldn't mean whatever you have works. It didn't before the shortage and it won't now.

_________________
Mark...You are entitled to your own opinion. You aren't entitled to your own facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hammer bill
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 12:30 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 815

The less of money makes a man do strange things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brewster11
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 4:57 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1301
Location: Western WA

Notwithstanding the germane comments here, it seems to me that the shortage and disappearance of reloading components (which by the way IS likely to be permanent, not a passing inconvenience) has shown that the absolute necessity of extensive pressure tests and precise load constituents is a MYTH.

Yes, a myth propagated by legal departments of powder and firearm makers, testing establishments, and purveyors of all things related to reloading.

Why do I believe this? Several reasons.

First, an examination of published pressure test tables for various 16 ga loads reveals no dangerous pressure deviations for 1 oz or less loads at or below 1200 fps with any powder or component combination. If anything, a careful study reveals glaring inconsistencies for identical loads and load trends between different publishers and even within a publication series, calling into question the reliability of published load data.

Second, the reloading equipment and techniques used by recreational reloaders are physically incapable of maintaining the precise reloading tolerances used by manufacturers and testing labs, no matter how practiced and dedicated the amateur might be. A simple statistical analysis of dissected recreational reloading samples will quickly demonstrate it.

Third, given the extremely high likelihood, if not absolute certainty of gross elementary errors and mistakes by amateur reloaders (double powder throws, excess shot, etc) any dangerous reloads causing damage and injuries would immediately result in legal proceedings that would cause reloading components, especially powder and primers, to made unavailable to recreational shooters. This has not happened, for reasons of chemistry, metallurgy, and internal ballistics that are beyond the scope of this discussion.

Finally, we must remember that for nearly half a century after the introduction of smokeless powders and firearms designed for them, shotshell reloading in distant locales and foreign countries was a matter of necessity, using whatever shot, powder and primers that were available, measured with crude dippers, and loaded with a whatever wads that could be obtained or fashioned by hand. And yet the practice of recreational shotshell reloading has grown and flourished in spite of it.

Does this mean that we can throw caution to the wind and proceed without a thought of care and attention to detail? ABSOLUTELY NOT. It merely means that we need not be handcuffed by rigid presumptions and hidebound beliefs at a time when resourcefulness and new innovative practices are called for, lest our sport crumble away.

V/R
B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MSM2019
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 5:12 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2019
Posts: 1819
Location: Central ND

1 oz. loads using Red Dot, 700-X, Clays etc will be over SAAMI MAP if you load to 1200 FPS.

The idea that the reloading machines we use can't reload as well as and accurately as the commercial equipment is untrue. Yes we can, all you have to do is pull 10 loads off a properly adjusted MEC 9000 series machine and run them over a chronograph and you will see very consistent velocities, as good as the commercial ammo.

I agree no one will probably destroy a shotgun with reloads. However that doesn't mean that just because you haven't hurt a shotgun you aren't subjecting the gun to ammunition that should not be used in it.

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on this subject.

_________________
Mark...You are entitled to your own opinion. You aren't entitled to your own facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Brewster11
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 5:55 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1301
Location: Western WA

Thank you Mark for your comments. A couple notes here:

There are validated spreadsheets posted on this site that show several 1 oz 1200+ fps Red Dot and 700-X loads comfortably under 11,500 psi. There may well be the very same identical loads showing excess of 11,500 in other validated publications. That may say more about the publication sources than the load itself.

I agree in part with your point of reloader accuracy. I have seen the same with my 600 Jr - extremely consistent strings with sub-tenth of a grain powder variance. At the same time, when reloading a hundred or so rounds at a sitting, I will occasionally observe a round with a dished crimp, or bulged crimp, maybe one in a couple hundred or more. I always stop and examine the round. Inevitably it will be a short charge or overcharge. Why? Maybe a clog, or clump, static cling, or some other inexplicable thing.

Regarding matching the gun with the load, yes that should always be in the very forefront of our minds.

Thanks
B.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MSM2019
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2022 7:31 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2019
Posts: 1819
Location: Central ND

Brewster11,

Thanks for being a gentleman. Very much appreciated.

_________________
Mark...You are entitled to your own opinion. You aren't entitled to your own facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fn16ga
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 5:32 am  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Jan 2013
Posts: 2165
Location: Florida

Brewster11 wrote:


But my point is we MUST swap components because we have no choice now. And if an extra 3000 psi might be a problem, don’t shoot the gun. Our modern guns can handle that comfortably.

B.


I don't think I want to constantly shoot any load that is an extra 3000psi over max (11500psi)in any of my guns.

The problem is when swapping any components in a load you really don't know what the exact outcome will be . As example I here all the time that the Ched 209 and Win 209 are very close to the same and alot of folks have no problem subbing one for the other . I have test loads that show this is not true, most of the time (not always) the Ched 209 will increase pressures by as much as 2000psi . Thats ok in a load that is 9000psi but not ok in a load that is near max.

Bottom line is you should stick to good published loads.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hammer bill
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 7:47 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 815

The real bottom line is their may not be any published loads for the shooting we all want to do. Americans are very hard headed and very creative when you tell them you can't have this or that. Bill
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stx4wheeler
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2022 7:56 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 06 Jan 2021
Posts: 89
Location: Florida

I’m a little confused by this topic, the 16 gauge community has many spreadsheets with 1oz data being the most prolific using many many different powders/wads/hulls.

So far I have not run into a load I wanted to make that doesn’t exist in these spreadsheets. There are surely powders that you would not want to push to 1oz 1200 ft/s.

Maybe I am missing the intention of the original posting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
All times are GMT - 7 Hours

View next topic
View previous topic
Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next
16ga.com Forum Index  ~  16ga. Ammunition & Reloading

Post new topic   Reply to topic


 
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB and NoseBleed v1.09