Bismuth Handload

[J. A. EARLY]

***

[J.B. Books]

Originally Posted by Jerry Harlow

I just picked some loads using Cheddite hulls which are readily available in new primed form from the two sources. Remembering that Bismuth is lighter than lead, I feel that the few more grains of Longshot delivering the shot at perhaps 100 fps faster would give the same penetration as lead, since Bismuth will not have quite the killing power. Longshot I have found is a very dirty burning powder, perhaps not burning completely, and maybe the reason for heavier charges in the Cheddite hull which I use it with, as compared to the WWAA hull using less powder but a hotter primer. I think the recoil since both are 1 1/4 ounce loads would be negligible and unnoticed, but that is a decision for the shooter.

The slowest load you posted was at 1350 fps, that will produce 22% more recoil than an 1 1/4 ounce load going 1250. At 1400 fps recoil is 32% greater. That is a significant difference that both the gun and shooter have to absorb, one is going to feel it. Bismuth does act like lead and velocity is the enemy of tight patterns, in addition bismuth is more brittle and pellets have been known to shatter further reducing effectiveness. The old timers knew to increase killing power at longer range you increase the mass of the pellet, it still works today. I have been shooting bismuth reloads in 12 and 10 gauge for about 25 years with good effect. Loads moving at 1150 to 1250 work great with the proper shot size, I found there is no need to beat up a gun and shoulder with a higher velocity. I have never concerned myself with whether a powder is dirty or not unless I am shooting a gas automatic.

[Joe from MO]

Originally Posted by Pete Lester

Loads moving at 1150 to 1250 work great with the proper shot size, I found there is no need to beat up a gun and shoulder with a higher velocity. I have never concerned myself with whether a powder is dirty or not unless I am shooting a gas automatic.

This is the sort of load I am looking for. I care more about the gun than I do killing ducks. And, I am not a pass shooter, I like to pull them into the stool, before taking them... So, Bismuth is lighter, so what shot size do you like for decoying ducks? #4 or #5 would be my thinking, I always liked #5's when shooting lead back in the day.

Thanks for all the responses. I have over 40 years in metalic cartridge handloads, but just started with shot shells last year when I picked up a friend of mine's MEC Sizemaster. So far I have only loaded #8 1 1/8 oz target loads. And still get frustrated trying to figure out how to get the perfect crimp......

[J. A. EARLY]

///

[Woodcock survey]

[QUOTE=Jerry Harlow;302853]

Originally Posted by Pete Lester

The slowest load you posted was at 1350 fps, that will produce 22% more recoil than an 1 1/4 ounce load going 1250. At 1400 fps recoil is 32% greater.

Just wondering why if both loads are 1 1/4 ounces, 100 fps more would produce 22% greater recoil and 200 fps 32%. What is the source for these percentage figures? In an 8 pound 2 frame gun(with two shells in the chambers)? Just looking for the source since I don't see or feel the same in one ounce target loads at 1150 fps compared to the one ounce hunting loads at 1250 fps. Thanks.

If memory serves(ha-ha) Tom Roster did an article for Shooting Sportsman 4-5 or more years ago on that subject . You pay a stiff price in recoil for a small increase in velocity. The bigger downside is how fast that added velocity is lost.
It may seem counter- intuitive but the 100 fps gain does not carry downrange at that increase but at 40 yds. is negligible.

[Joe from MO]

[QUOTE=Daniel Carter;302863]

Originally Posted by Jerry Harlow

If memory serves(ha-ha) Tom Roster did an article for Shooting Sportsman 4-5 or more years ago on that subject . You pay a stiff price in recoil for a small increase in velocity. The bigger downside is how fast that added velocity is lost.
It may seem counter- intuitive but the 100 fps gain does not carry downrange at that increase but at 40 yds. is negligible.

This one: https://www.shotgunlife.com/shotguns...peed-kill.html

[J.B. Books]

[QUOTE=Jerry Harlow;302853]

Originally Posted by Pete Lester

The slowest load you posted was at 1350 fps, that will produce 22% more recoil than an 1 1/4 ounce load going 1250. At 1400 fps recoil is 32% greater.

Just wondering why if both loads are 1 1/4 ounces, 100 fps more would produce 22% greater recoil and 200 fps 32%. What is the source for these percentage figures? In an 8 pound 2 frame gun(with two shells in the chambers)? Just looking for the source since I don't see or feel the same in one ounce target loads at 1150 fps compared to the one ounce hunting loads at 1250 fps. Thanks.

I used an online shotgun recoil calculator to get precise difference in ft lbs for 7 pound 12 ounce gun which is about what most 12ga Trojans weigh.

http://www.huntamerica.com/recoil_calculator/

An ounce and quarter at 1350 to 1450 is way too stiff for my tastes and too stiff for old classic doubles as far as I am concerned. You definitely do not need that kind of velocity to kill waterfowl with the right size bismuth shot, even at 40 yards. Have you patterned them at 40 yards to see what they are doing?

[J. A. EARLY]

+++

[J.B. Books]

[QUOTE=Jerry Harlow;302903]

Originally Posted by Pete Lester

I tried that website to see how they came up with their calculations which I believe are way too high, but it is blocked telling me it is a dangerous website (?).

As I stated before, if their calculations are correct, I should notice quite a bit of difference between 1 ounce loads going 1150 fps (2 3/4 dram equivalent), 1200 fps (3 dram equivalent), and 1250 fps (3 1/4 dram equivalent), but I have never felt a 22% increase in recoil between the first and the third load, which if the chart is correct would apply.

Here is what Tom Roster has to say about lead and tungsten for velocities and then what he clearly states for loads with shot that is less dense than lead, for which he supports higher velocities:

"...the science-based reality that with lead and nontoxic tungsten-composite pellet hunting loads possessing lead shot equivalent pellet densities, all you need for effective (spelled: lethal) velocity is something near 1250 fps ± 50 fps. For steel loads, all that is needed is something near 1350 fps ± 50 fps."

Bismuth as we know is not lead equivalent (but denser than steel); therefore Tom Roster is recommending between 1300 and 1400 fps for stuff less than lead. I believe that is why Hevi-shot has loaded their "Hevi Bismuth" shells that are "FOR MODERN AND CLASSIC GUNS" at 1400 fps. I feel certain that they have done more testing than any of us could ever imagine before releasing their product and advertising that they were "safe" for classic guns. They apparently know something about downrange velocities as well.

I do know for sure that modern steel loads at these extremely high velocities are like night and day compared to the initial steel loads first brought onto the market that were being pushed at normal velocities of 1200 fps. I forbade those goose hunting with me to use the early loads. They too have seen the need for higher downrange velocities. To each his own and I won't argue with whatever someone else is successful with but I always look for an edge for not every shot I make is perfect and I hate wounded game birds.

If you are happy shooting a 1 1/4 ounce load at 1400 fps out of a 7 3/4 lb classic double have fun. I have found there is no need to punish the gun and and my shoulder with something that heavy. Personally I don't think it's good advice especially when you don't know the condition of the gun they will be used in. There are plenty of people on this forum successfully taking ducks and geese with bismuth loadings in 10 and 12 gauge guns with a velocity between 1150 and 1250. Again if you want greater killing power at longer range increase the mass of the pellet. Try shot size 3.5 from Roto Metals on ducks. It looks to be about the same number of pellets per ounce , 137 as the original Bismuth Cartridge Company #4 (which was oversized, almost a #3, late in production they downsized the #4 pellet). The "old" 4's work great on ducks and close geese at 1150 to 1250 fps and I'll bet those 3.5's will too. I am just about out of bismuth #1 and I think I am going to try Roto Metals #0 next for geese.