RST shortage, and other 2-1/2" shell sources?

[Austin J Hawthorne Jr.]

I'm with Aaron. Do we get to split the prize?

[Dean Weber]

Originally Posted by Bruce Day

There are always those who claim that Remington 1 oz 1200fps shells produce much more recoil than RST 1 oz 1200 fps shells. RST uses slow burning powder ( PB?) which lengthens the period of pressure but does not reduce the peak pressure. Because the length of push is longer it is often perceived as less than shorter duration loads when the recoil energy is the same. Recoil energy is of course not the same as, but related to , chamber pressure. Chamber pressures for all these loads is below SAAMI maximum.

Of these different brand cartridges, which produces the greatest foot pounds of recoil ?

1 oz payload at 1200 fps

[Bruce Day]

There are many recoil calculators on the internet to use. All of them require the weight and velocity of the mass of everything that goes out the barrel over the mass of the gun. So , with that in mind And assuming the weight of the test gun is constant and the weight of the gas propellant and wad is roughly the same , the faster loads have more recoil. We have said that these are all 1 oz loads , so your choice to reduce recoil is to shoot a load with less fps or use a heavier gun. So the Remington and RST loads have the same recoil energy with 1200 fps and the others have less , with 1165 fps, etc.

Note that chamber length, angle of forcing cone , choke , size of shot , and design of the wad have nothing to do with recoil foot pounds.

[Dylan Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Bruce Day

There are many recoil calculators on the internet to use. All of them require the weight and velocity of the mass of everything that goes out the barrel over the mass of the gun. So , with that in mind And assuming the weight of the test gun is constant and the weight of the gas propellant and wad is roughly the same , the faster loads have more recoil. We have said that these are all 1 oz loads , so your choice to reduce recoil is to shoot a load with less fps or use a heavier gun. So the Remington and RST loads have the same recoil energy with 1200 fps and the others have less , with 1165 fps, etc.

Note that chamber length, angle of forcing cone , choke , size of shot , and design of the wad have nothing to do with recoil foot pounds.

This is correct, its really a simple physics problem. every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Sum of the energy in the longitudinal direction must be equal. The energy going forward being "pushed" off of the breach of the gun if you will, is directly absorbed by trying to move the mass of the gun and then your shoulder/buttplate or pad backwards. forcing cone, choke size, etc all would be in the radial direction and as such would be reacted against by the barrel, which in turn "pushes" back on the expansion of the gas and thats what causes things to go out the end of the gun.

Of course, you could make the philosophical arguement that eventually the barrel becomes so constricted the physics changes (squib loads and stuck wads)....but that only happens when the barrel reaction stresses can not contain the rapid expansion and thus you see catastrophic failure. The equations necessary to model this are highly complex due to the extremely short period of time it takes place in, you've departed classical mechanics and entered into the world of trying to model this as an energy strain relationship system, through some FEA or similar.

Source: My college research paper on system design which I wrote on load considerations to optimize the weight of the modern shotgun.

[Harry Gietler]

At rock mountain and Ernie's I had cases upon cases of low brass 16ga.
shells. Only one ''nice'' fellow bought (2) boxes, the other 10 cases
I carried home. It was quite a hike to my truck, never again !

Harry

P.S.--My prices were the same as RST's

[Aaron Beck]

One thing I appreciate from rst is the variety of offerings. Low pressure or not, I dont frequently wish to shoot 1 oz at 1200 fps. 3/4 or 7/8 in the light gun

[Kevin McCormack]

Originally Posted by Harry Gietler

At rock mountain and Ernie's I had cases upon cases of low brass 16ga.
shells. Only one one ''nice'' fellow bought (2) boxes, the other 10 cases
I carried home. It was quite a hike to my truck, never again !

Harry

At your price point Harry, that should tell you something!

[Kevin McCormack]

Originally Posted by Garry L Gordon

Alas, there are no shotgun shells of any kind at our local stores. I'm glad I don't shoot that much and have a fair stash of RSTs.

Could this be a good side to low bird numbers?

Or conversely, as Frank Zappa put it, "Could this be Phase 1 of Lumpy Gravy?"

[Mike Poindexter]

I know this thread has taken a slight twist off of the original topic, but as long as we are here, I have a couple of questions. Does the acceleration of the shot charge leaving the shell until it leaves the barrel vary from load to load? Is there any recoil associated with this acceleration, or does no recoil occur until the charge leaves the muzzle? Just wondering.

[Dean Romig]

Recoil begins at the instant of ignition.





.