 |
|
 |
|
| Notices |
Welcome to the new PGCA Forum! As well, since it
is new - please read the following:
This is a new forum - so you must REGISTER to this Forum before posting;
If you are not a PGCA Member, we do not allow posts selling, offering or brokering firearms and/or parts; and
You MUST REGISTER your REAL FIRST and LAST NAME as your login name.
To register:
Click here..................
If you are registered to the forum and keep getting logged
out: Please
Click Here...
Welcome & enjoy!
To read the Posts, Messages & Threads in the PGCA Forum, you must be REGISTERED and LOGGED INTO your account! To Register, as a New User please see the Registration Link Above. If you are registered, but not Logged In, please Log in with your account Username and Password found on this page to the top right.
|
06-30-2013, 09:08 PM
|
#1
|
Member
|
|
|
Member Info
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,134
Thanks: 18,891
Thanked 8,159 Times in 3,087 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Lester
Jeff, although the cost savings between 1 1/8 and 7/8 ounce traps loads is only 75 cents a box. However getting more loads out of a jug of powder and a bag of shot is a good thing in this time of component shortages. I can get almost 15 more boxes of shells out of an 8lb jug of Red Dot using 7/8 and 4 more boxes of shells out of a 25lb bag of shot vs. 1 1/8 loadings. The lower recoil of the lighter loads is better for the gun and less fatigue for the shooter.
|
Looks like a win/win/win situation for your pocketbook, your shoulder and your gun.
|
|
|
|
06-30-2013, 10:09 PM
|
#2
|
Member
|
|
|
Member Info
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,099
Thanks: 2,228
Thanked 6,400 Times in 2,099 Posts
|
|
I like the lighter loads for the reduced recoil and they break targets just as well maybe better than the heavier loads due to better pattern density. BUT if you think your saveing money on the increased number of shells per bag offset that with the increased use of primers and wads. I think the cost saveings in dollars is very small.
|
|
|
|