"progressive" powders and tight patterns

[Rick Losey]

from my readings, one of the factors in the early twentieth century search for a range shotgun and a load for it (such as the original Super-X) was the development of "progressive" powders - more of a ever increasing push of building velocity rather than an sudden explosion and set back of the charge.

the thought as I understand it (and believe it) was that a gentler start and then building of the load's velocity as it moved down the barrel damaged fewer pellets and resulted in a tighter down range pattern.

if you look at modern power manufacturer's descriptions you see fast burning and slow burning powders - or no reference at all to burn rate and nothing about "progressive"

my guess would be -for a good as any of my guesses are - is that "slow burning" is the modern equivalent of "progressive" in marketing speak

now - the reason for the thought-

this year I will be feeding a battery of duck guns - a Super Fox, a 3 frame Parker and a Smith Longrange - all 12's of course with heavy barrels

I think is would be interesting to try to replicate the performance of the waterfowl loads like the original Super-x as near as possible with modern components - Nice Shot or bismuth-- understanding these are not copper plated lead and I will likely use plastic wads - although that is not a given

i have a summer to experiment at the pattern board -
i do have a 10ga load from Pete's great chart that will pattern some old high antimony lead 4's at 91/92 percent at 40 yards out of my tighter than heck British short ten - with IMR7625 as the propellant - so I may start the quest with that powder and that shot or some old copper 6's and can then limit the non-tox testing some due to the cost of the shot- :whistle:

and before all the nay-saying - no - i don't think i can shoot like Mr Buck and am not intending to sky bust at 80 yards

just looking to have a little fun and see a nice even tight pattern that will do the job if i do mine - and a clean hit or a clean miss rather than a cripple down in the thick part of the marsh

and I do think it would be interesting to see what the old guns can do with as good of a representation of the loads they were designed around as can be recreated now a days

so- with an1 1/4 oz of shot- what load recipe would you try?

[charlie cleveland]

first i would use 1 3/8 ounce of shot as the first 3 inch guns used..i am presuming your guns have 3 inch chambers...i would probably use bluedot powder....charlie

[Pete Lester]

I would look at using Hodgdon Long Shot powder. Slow burning, low pressure and can produce very high velocities although I would stick with slower speeds. It burns as you mention and like 7625 it provides a louder boom with the same loads using other powders.

[Rick Losey]

first i would use 1 3/8 ounce of shot as the first 3 inch guns used..i am presuming your guns have 3 inch chambers...i would probably use bluedot powder....charlie

the longrange is a 3" the Parker and Super are 2 3/4

[Frank Cronin]

Rick,

Try Winchester 572. It's new and it's a powder I'm going to try next.

Check out the Hodgdon site. You can get good velocities and the PSI are respectable. For the heavy stuff I always use Federal GM hulls and wads.

1 1/4 oz of lead shot
24.7 grains of 572
Federal GM hull
Federal S3 wad
Federal 209 primer
8000 PSI
1220 FPS

This new Winchester powder is strategically designed to do a myriad of jobs. First it has the correct burn rate to create the famous 3 ¼ dram equivalent, 1 ¼ oz, 1330 fps 12 gauge load, originated by Winchester. And, it does it with any brand case! Back Fence competitors and pheasant hunters will be delighted. Now, that is just one application, and it goes on to provide clay target loads superb in 20 gauge and 28 gauge, top field loads in both, and, outstanding field loads for the wonderful 16 gauge. In addition, 572 has a vast number of pistol applications, ranging from the 25 ACP to the 45 ACP, and all popular calibers in between. This is one positively versatile and useful propellant.

[Rick Losey]

Thanks Frank- i saw that write up while researching this idea this weekend - i wondered about it

nice shot will add about 1500PSI - so still something the Super and these others can handle

please let me know how your tryouts go and i will as well

[John Dallas]

Why does Nice Shot increase pressure so much? Is it denser than lead, so that it is heavier for a given volume?

[Rick Losey]

Why does Nice Shot increase pressure so much? Is it denser than lead, so that it is heavier for a given volume?

i actually do not know- that is the figure that seems to be accepted

but the Nice shot site only says ""Nice Shot" has a slightly higher chamber pressure than an equal lead load."


i wonder if the figure came from here

http://randywakeman.com/Nice_Shot_Reloading_Pressures.htm

"Nice Shot, at 14-16 Brinell, is no harder than 5% and 6% antimony lead, or the best “magnum” shot. Hodgdon Powder Company evaluated Nice Shot, and suggested that a comfortable area to load in would be subtracting 1500 PSI from their published lead data, although the average difference in pressure was less."

and

"High-antimony lead runs approx. 11.1 g/cc density. Nice Shot runs about 10.3 g/cc. While lead reloading data is by actual weight, proper shotshell assembly is by dimension. Using a lead charge bar for Nice Shot automatically reduces payload by about 7%, so no pressure issues are plausible. "

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/confused/confused-face-smiley-emoticon.gif

[Daryl Corona]

Rick, if you can find it, 4756 duplicates the old 3 1/4- 1 1/4 Federal live pigeon load.

[Rick Losey]

Rick, if you can find it, 4756 duplicates the old 3 1/4- 1 1/4 Federal live pigeon load.


oh - I can find it :rotf: its on the shelf behind the 7625

as a waterfowl load- i am concerned about its reputation for poor cold weather performance

[Daryl Corona]

as a waterfowl load- i am concerned about its reputation for poor cold weather performance

I used it for years in some cold wet weather and it performed as expected. I'd have to look up my load data but if memory serves me right I used the Federal 209/209A which is a hotter primer and the RXP12 PP29928 wad which I have an ample supply of if you are interested.

[Harry Collins]

I thought 7625 was no longer being produced and that it had the poor reputation in cold weather. I have just a teasing amount left. 4756 is my 1 1/4 oz 10 gauge powder.

[Rick Losey]

I thought 7625 was no longer being produced and that it had the poor reputation in cold weather. I have just a teasing amount left. 4756 is my 1 1/4 oz 10 gauge powder.

neither is made any longer , however I have a supply of each
i have used the 4756 very little - and base my concerns on the discussions on this board

such as http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=18319&highlight=4756

[Daryl Corona]

I also used 4756 in my 20 ga. loads for years until 20/28 came along.

[Richard Flanders]

I think the "famous" 1330fps, 1-1/4 oz load is 3-3/4dram equivalent, not 3-1/4. That's what all my old and new boxes read.

[Frank Cronin]

Did a little research on the interweb what I could find with 572... very little out there by the way.....

I guess 572 was developed as a replacement for discontinued IMR 4756. I really liked 4756 and I had no issues with it.

Last time I was at a gun shop in NH they had it on the shelf... probably go and pick up a bottle next time I'm there.

[Frank Srebro]

Deleted - duplicate

[Frank Srebro]

Rick, I think you'll find that single-base 7625 or better yet 4756 are as close as you're going to get to DuPont's progressive "Oval" or the Western Powder Company's equivalent that used a different technology. Although both were called progressive burning they might have been better called "slow ignition".

Just as an aside I've read for years now that 7625 can be erratic at cold temps and I wonder if that's because of gents loading to VERY low pressure and having plastic wad gas sealing problems, or possibly some correspondents just repeating what they've read? A few years ago I debunked it at least for myself by leaving a bag of 7625 loaded 12-gauge shells outside overnight in sub-zero temps in the bed of a pickup truck, and shooting 100 of them the next morning on a sporting course when the ambient was in the negative Fahrenheit numbers to start out. They all went off with authority with no perceptible recoil reduction as compared with shooting the same loads at normal temps. The IMR chart showed pressure at about 8000 psi, temp not stated but probably 70-80 degrees in a ballistics lab. Pressure was undoubtedly lower when I shot them that morning on the sporting course.

Lastly, if you shoot 2-3/4" shells in that LCS Long Range/3-inch chamber you'll probably lose about 8-10% efficiency (pattern percentage) at 40 yards. That's with lead shot.

frank

[Rick Losey]

Thanks Frank

I'll give them both a try - the 12 gauge loads will not be seriously low pressure- the guns don't need it - no need for roman candles though

i'll also pattern for the difference in the 2 3/4 and 3" in the Smith

i also will be interest to find out what pattern difference there may be between lead and Nice Shot or Bismuth

[Carl G. Bachhuber]

My go-to duck load during the 'lead years' consisted of 1-3/8 oz of high antimony #5 shot and whatever Winchester listed as their max charge of W571. I used it in AA or Peters blue 2-3/4 cases. I believe claimed muzzle velocity was supposed to be 1330 fps. If you fired enough of those you would get a nose bleed, but they really worked. I had no problems with temperature and I did a lot of shooting when it was well below 32 deg. So today I use 1-3/8 of bismuth or tungsten polymer, which seem to work quite well. Also in my old age I have found that if I slow down the muzzle velocity a bit pattern percentages go up.
C.G.B.

[Rick Losey]

thanks

less powder and better patterns is a long standing general rule-

my goal is to get those old patterns at the longer range with Nice Shot and perhaps Bismuth

and my goal has never been to get nose bleeds :shock:


back in the lead pre-steel days my long range load out my doubles was a Remington express load- 1 1/4 #4 for geese and big ducks - #6 over decoys

i still have a few #4's left- they are saved for troublesome varmints -out of of a full choke they will end the marauding of a large racoon at a real distance

[Bill Murphy]

For pattern testing, I don't think you have to use expensive shot. My patterns shot with my old #4 lead duck loads, 1 1/4 ounce, Herco powder, were so tight when fired out of a .040 choked Sterlingworth, that the 60 yard patterns would fill a mallard full of shot. At 40 yards, the patterns were too tight to shoot at any bird. With harder shot, that gun may have shot patterns in the mid 90s at 40 yards. I still take these pattern sheets out occasionally, just for a look.

[charlie cleveland]

that is a tight patterned gun bill.. i have a lc smith long range that will shoot low 90 s percent all day... i ve read that fellow that hunted with a 6 ga muzzle loader could put 100 percent in the 30 inch circle at 40 yards....charlie

[charlie cleveland]

thats a tight shooting gun bill..i read some where the old guy that shot the 6 ga muzzle loader could put 100 percent in the 30 inch circle at 40 yards....pete lester has a gun that shoots low 90 percent at this range...charlie

[Bill Murphy]

Fred Kimble shot patterns out of his 6 gauge Tonks that many people found to be hard to believe, as Charlie mentions. I didn't find it hard to believe because I have shot similar patterns. The patterns I found to be the most unusual were from my W&C Scott 16 gauge, 26" gun. Using factory one ounce roll crimped factory loads, this little less than 6 pound 16 gauge regularly shot 90% or better patterns.

[Rick Losey]

My 10ga J P Clabrough & Brothers hammergun will pattern lead at 91/92 %

again - just trying to come up with a non tox load that will perform well out of the three heavy 12's

a variety of components are on the way - the experimentation will begin soon

[Frank Srebro]

Rick, JFYI I did performance testing over this past winter of some popular factory non-tox shells using (three) vintage 3-inch 12's, and have a summary article in queue with the DGJ. The Cotes' told me while at the Southern that it will be in the upcoming issue or the following one, and that depends on their content mix. Some of the data was eye opening but that's all I want to say right now. :)

frank

[Rick Losey]

that's great to hear Frank

i'll look forward to reading it

[Dean Romig]

Notwithstanding all of the aforesaid, while keeping in mind the real possibility that a load that works well in one gun may not do as well in another gun, let alone a third gun.

I'll be very interested in the pattern board results of your testing Rick.

Dean





.

[Rick Losey]

Notwithstanding all of the aforesaid, while keeping in mind the real possibility that a load that works well in one gun may not do as well in another gun, let alone a third gun.

I'll be very interested in the pattern board results of your testing Rick.

Dean
.


Agreed Dean. And the bores and chokes are very different in these three guns

So lots of time at the pattern board. Hate to say it on the Parker board - but the priority gun is to get a couple loads set for the Super Fox. Being an early one it is back bored (.745) and well choked (.047)

After that I'll see what works best in the other two

Hopefully I can find one that has suitable performance in each


I would hate to have to serial number loads to guns :whistle:

[Frank Srebro]

Notwithstanding all of the aforesaid, while keeping in mind the real possibility that a load that works well in one gun may not do as well in another gun, let alone a third gun.

I'll be very interested in the pattern board results of your testing Rick.

Dean
.

Dean, that's so true even with shells from the same loading lot number that are fired in the same gun, the efficiency (percentage) can vary widely from shot to shot. And human nature what it is, gents will often cite the highest number for their pet long range duck gun. It's always good to shoot 3-5 shots with each load and calculate/report the mean for that gun. Rick, get ready for "Excedrin headache #12" as my duck hunting buds often joke = repetitive heavy loads and especially when fired on paper from a bench. :banghead:

frank

[Rick Losey]

Yes Frank. I normally do three from each barrel. And with the cost and availability of Nice Shot - not going to do more than that. Plus a few sent out for pressure testing first. Just developing a hunting load. Not writing a thesis :)


I also always use paper rather than the steel plate for pattern testing. That way I can take them home and check them over carefully

As for the shooting. I have fortunately never been recoil sensitive _ most likely a sign of some deficiency some where