2-1/2" load data collection

[John Farrell, Charter Member #33]

Mike - here's a history lesson. It does not come from any recognized authority, powder company, shell manufacturer or Cliff Claven. It is simply a solution derived from common sense.

I find that recipe differences between 2 1/2" shotshell loads and 2 3/4" shotshell loads is nil. The only difference between the two shells is there is less plastic (or paper) above the shot in the 2 1/2" shell versus big brother.

The sole reason for the 2 3/4" shell is the shotshell industry moved to a fold crimp from a roll crimp. The roll crimp was more expensive, (crimping machine replacement wise) and required a printed overshot card to complete the assembly. The cost of replacing the crimp tools was ameliorated with the fold crimp. The amount of hull above the shot for a fold crimp is greater than that required in the roll crimped shells. Solution for 2 3/4" shotshells - add more hull.

I regularly reload shells and roll crimp them with the same recipe I use for fold crimp shells. For 2 1/2" reloads, think about roll crimping your finished hulls. I find that lo pressure 2 3/4" recipes work just fine in my shorter reloads.

[Mike Kasterin]

John-I have reloaded for many years but hardly experimented at all. I have heard/read that roll crimps are lower pressure than fold. which seem to make sense. I ahve loaded 16 gauge fold crimp 2-1/2" and 2-5/8" cases with success using recipes from the 16 gauge reloaders group or Ballistic Products manuals.

I may roll crimp eventually, but I'd also like to just fold crimp 2-1/2s. So what you say is that the pressure is the same using 2-3/4" load data including the same wads, in 2-3/4" cases.

Mike