Kent Bismuth in 12 gauge Trojan

[Scott Chapman]

Looking for comments about using Kent's new Bismuth Waterfowl 2 3/4" 1 1/4 oz, 1325 fps, 10,800 psi loads in my 12 gauge Trojan 30".

I had the Trojan checked out by Kirk Merrington a couple years ago and he gave me the thumbs up that it was in good shooting shape.

It is my understanding that I should be more concerned about wear and tear to the wood than the barrels and action.

I ran a box or so through the Trojan a couple weeks ago in Canada. They did produce noticeable recoil, but the #5s sure did stone ducks at a goodly distance, especially high over head mallards with the left barrel.

[charlie cleveland]

scott you will get mixed feelings about this load from every body...to me no more shells than you will shoot in your gun i would say shoot them....i have guns that i shoot steel shot at ducks with it is a long range lc smith 3 inch chambered gun i even shot several 3 inch steel thru it my barrels are modified choke...i have not hurt the barrels and the wood is still fine....this is my opinion on your gun but listen to others also....charlie

[B. Dudley]

Why ask about shooting them in it now that you already did it? It must not have bothered you all that much at the time.

That gun has likely digested hotter loats than that in its past.

[OH Osthaus]

You reference the pressure

Figure out the recoil


Pressure is for the metal

Recoil is for the wood

[Scott Chapman]

Originally Posted by Brian Dudley

Why ask about shooting them in it now that you already did it? It must not have bothered you all that much at the time.

That gun has likely digested hotter loats than that in its past.

Just because I did it once and got away with it (I didn't know the pressures were +10,000 psi at the time) means that I want to continue if the sage advise is against the practice.

I thought that I had read somewhere on this forum that 12 gauge Trojans had pretty stout frame #2 and that higher pressure loads from standard "high brass" loads in the old days (2 3/4" 1 1/4 oz lead) should not be a great concern.

My son hopes to use the Trojan to take a few ducks at the end of the month on the opening of youth only weekend. I wanted some reassurance that I can turn him loose with the Bismuth.

[Craig Larter]

Why not purchase RST bismuth with pressure and velocity ideal for vintage guns. No worries.

[Dean Romig]

Indeed get some RST’s - why start your son off with those heavy flinch inducers?

A looong tome ago when I was about 13 I shot a borrowed Trojan with off-the-shelf heavy duck loads. I was too small for the gun to begin with let alone stuffing such cannon fodder into it. Yup, I developed a flinch and I kept on shooting the Trojan because it was way cooler than my cheap little single shot 20.

I guess my point is why shoot that stuff when there is something less punishing and about as effective?





.

[Tom Flanigan]

I agree with Dean. I also don't think the hot 1 1/4 oz loads at 1325 fps. are the most effective. My duck guns patterned the old pigeon load of 1 1/4 at 1200 fps. better. I did a test in Sasketechawan of the +1300 fps loads vs. the 1200 fps. loads. In addition to a significant reduction in recoil, I definitely had more ducks dead in the air with the 1200 fps. loads. I could tell difference. I think it was the shorter shot string of the lower velocity loads that made the difference. I don't know for sure and my test was far from scientific, but I am covinced that the +1300 loads do not perform as well as the 1200 fps. loads. I never use +1300 1 1/4 oz. loads for anything after that test.

[mobirdhunter]

All that you do to (or for) and old gun is cumulative. If its materials are stressed, it will catch up with you (and the gun) -- or the next owner -- in some fashion. Yes, they are tough, but why pound an old gun when you don't have to...and with the options for shells that we have now, you don't have to. If it's about the cost, well, I can't help there. That's between you and your wallet (or spouse, who may have your wallet anyway).

[Pa. Parker Pal]

SPORTING CLASSICS MAG. JUST DID AN ARTICLE ON THESE SHELLS WHICH I THOUGHT WAS A LITTLE MIS-LEADING. THE AUTHOR STATED THAT THESE SHELLS WERE GOOD TO USE IN OLDER VINTAGE SHOTGUNS. wITH THE LOAD SPECS THAT WERE PUBLISHED, i THOUGHT THEY WERE TOO HEAVY AND STATED SO IN MY COMMENT TO THAT ARTICLE. tHAT WAS MY HUMBLE OPINION.