![]()  | 
	
 
 
  | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#3 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			The difference in pressure is because of the hull length and the use of soft filler wad.
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#4 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			Here is the information sheets from these two loads. I did individually weight out the powder and shot for these loads.
		 
		
		
		
			 | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Matt Buckley For Your Post: | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#5 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			I've never understood why a shorter shell produces more pressure. If it does simply because it's shorter and that's the only difference, please explain why.
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
	Paul Harm  | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#6 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			I have duplicated this Bismuth load in a Remington hull with a cork filler under the shot and I'm going to send it in for testing. I would think with a roll crimp that this should have lower pressure like Victors 2 7/8" load. I will post the results when I get them. I'm looking for a goose hunting load for my lifter, that is why I'm going with #2 Bismuth.
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#7 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			Not likely. The tested loads are not identical, the 2 5/8" load used a Cheddite hull, the 2 7/8" load used a Remington hull.  I will wager use of the same hull will show closer results in pressure.
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
	Progress is the mortal enemy of the Outdoorsman.  | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
| The Following User Says Thank You to Pete Lester For Your Post: | 
| 
			
			 | 
		#8 | |||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 I look forward to seeing the results. The roll crimp is now the only significant difference from my load. Pressure should drop. Perhaps even below the pressures I produced. -Victor  | 
|||||||
| 
		
 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
|||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#9 | |||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 Also with the testing I had done using TSS , which always required the use of fillers , the more soft fillers ( felt , cushion wads ) = lower pressures and less consistency . As opposed to harder filler ( Nitro cards and cork ) = more pressure . But don't take my word for it you can always call Tom Arburst , he can explain it better than me.  | 
|||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
|||||||
| 
			
			 | 
		#10 | ||||||
 
  | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			Well, I'll have to call Tom. I don't see where there is less space for gas to expand. Yes the shell is shorter but that's because less space was used in the wad section not the powder section. I could see what type of wad or how deep the crimp was would effect pressure. After the holiday I'm gonna have to call him.
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
	Paul Harm  | 
||||||
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
||||||
![]()  | 
	
	
		
		
  | 
	
		
  |