Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Non-Parker Specific & General Discussions Shotgun Shell Reloading

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 08-29-2014, 09:35 AM   #1
Member
J.B. Books
PGCA Member
 
Pete Lester's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,092
Thanks: 1,892
Thanked 5,508 Times in 1,535 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Srebro View Post
This seems to discount the theory whereby a taller shot column - as with the same weight (mass) of bismuth vs. lead - will result in increased pressure due to more surface/friction of the shot against the bore, as the shot is accelerated. Just sayin.
Where is the evidence of that? Do you believe that surface area of the shot column against the bore has no effect on pressure?

Case in point. Sherman Bell's data for the Short Ten shows a Fed Hull, Win 209 primer, 32gr of SR7625 with SP10 wad and some filler for both 1 1/4 ounce lead and 1 1/4 ounce of Bismuth. The lead load uses a folded crimp and generated 6700 psi. The Bismuth load using a Roll Crimp (which reduces pressure) generated 7100.

I suspect if that Bismuth load had used a folded crimp there would be somewhere around 1000 psi greater with the Bismuth.
Pete Lester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 09:46 AM   #2
Member
Big Friend Ten (BFT)
PGCA Lifetime Member
 
Mark Ouellette's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,046
Thanks: 1,517
Thanked 2,935 Times in 795 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Lester View Post
Where is the evidence of that? Do you believe that surface area of the shot column against the bore has no effect on pressure?
Pete,

I believe it would have an effect but compared to the other factors, especially with modern plastic wads, that effect would be negligible.

I also believe that all else being equal a slower burning powder will produce less felt recoil than would a faster burning powder. The results of tests of this theory are subjective depending on the individuate test participants.

I like theories but am forced to accept hard data.

Mark
__________________
Don't hunt with a gun that will embarrass your dog!

USMC Retired
USMC Distinguished Marksman
USMC Distinguished Pistol Shot
NRA Benefactor - Ring of Freedom member
Mark Ouellette is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 09:48 AM   #3
Member
J.B. Books
PGCA Member
 
Pete Lester's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,092
Thanks: 1,892
Thanked 5,508 Times in 1,535 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Ouellette View Post
Pete,

I believe it would have an effect but compared to the other factors, especially with modern plastic wads, that effect would be negligible.

I also believe that all else being equal a slower burning powder will produce less felt recoil than would a faster burning powder. The results of tests of this theory are subjective depending on the individuate test participants.

I like theories but am forced to accept hard data.

Mark
I think I gave a pretty good example of the effect.
Pete Lester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 09:55 AM   #4
Member
Big Friend Ten (BFT)
PGCA Lifetime Member
 
Mark Ouellette's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,046
Thanks: 1,517
Thanked 2,935 Times in 795 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Lester View Post
I think I gave a pretty good example of the effect.

Pete,

Sorry, but I reread your posts in this thread and did not see it. Please include a link or the information in this thread for consideration.

Mark
__________________
Don't hunt with a gun that will embarrass your dog!

USMC Retired
USMC Distinguished Marksman
USMC Distinguished Pistol Shot
NRA Benefactor - Ring of Freedom member
Mark Ouellette is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 11:11 AM   #5
Member
J.B. Books
PGCA Member
 
Pete Lester's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,092
Thanks: 1,892
Thanked 5,508 Times in 1,535 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Ouellette View Post
Pete,

Sorry, but I reread your posts in this thread and did not see it. Please include a link or the information in this thread for consideration.

Mark
It is from Sherman Bell, check the last page of the Short Ten spreadsheet I put up this week.
Pete Lester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 10:11 AM   #6
Member
Bindlestiff
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Robin Lewis's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,118
Thanks: 703
Thanked 2,946 Times in 870 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Lester View Post

Case in point. Sherman Bell's data for the Short Ten shows a Fed Hull, Win 209 primer, 32gr of SR7625 with SP10 wad and some filler for both 1 1/4 ounce lead and 1 1/4 ounce of Bismuth. The lead load uses a folded crimp and generated 6700 psi. The Bismuth load using a Roll Crimp (which reduces pressure) generated 7100.
When loading shells, the shot is measured by volume and listed in ounces. I suspect the volume/ounce conversion is for lead. Do you think Sherman weighed or measured his Bismuth load? If he measured the shot and given Bismuth is less dense than lead, the Bismuth weight would be lighter than 1 1/4.... but generated higher psi. What would that indicate?
Robin Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-29-2014, 11:13 AM   #7
Member
J.B. Books
PGCA Member
 
Pete Lester's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,092
Thanks: 1,892
Thanked 5,508 Times in 1,535 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Lewis View Post
When loading shells, the shot is measured by volume and listed in ounces. I suspect the volume/ounce conversion is for lead. Do you think Sherman weighed or measured his Bismuth load? If he measured the shot and given Bismuth is less dense than lead, the Bismuth weight would be lighter than 1 1/4.... but generated higher psi. What would that indicate?
Since Bismuth loads are stated in weight and not volume I have always used an adjustable bar or a modifed mec bar that throws the desired of weight of Bismuth. I have never heard of anyone doing otherwise.

An equal weight of bismuth to lead is going to have a taller shot column.

PS. I am pretty certain Sherman weighed his Bismuth loads, the evidence is the difference in amount of filler wad needed for the same weight loadings vs. lead.
Pete Lester is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2025, Parkerguns.org
Copyright © 2004 Design par Megatekno
- 2008 style update 3.7 avec l'autorisation de son auteur par Stradfred.