ShotGunWorld Shotguns

It is currently Mon Aug 10, 2020 10:12 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Wed Jul 08, 2020 2:23 pm 
*Proud to be a*
*Proud to be a*

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:22 am
Posts: 8835
Location: Rochester, NY
RandyWakeman wrote:
Skeet_Man wrote:

But what does ANY of that have to do with the OPs question of using steel shot in his 58?


Everything.
1140M was not designed or tested with steel, nor was the Model 58, nor are the forcing cones, and weak steel / stubby cones are a poor combination for steel loads. What would anyone expect from a shotgun made from 1956–1963? A 55 year +shotgun wasn't intended for steel loads, much less tested with them . . . and, why would it have been?


I'm not disagreeing that shooting steel in a 58 would be a poor choice. What I'm saying is that there is nothing in Garza that states that, so referring that is a moot point, interestingly by your own admission 7 years ago.

Interestingly I can find no reference on Google to "1140M steel". I can find 1140 steel, but there is no reason to assume they are the same thing, as they likely aren't. Perhaps something specifically blended for Remington alone at the time, dunno.



_________________
S3 Smingler Shotgun Sports
Ian Smingler
585-613-8098
[email protected]
http://www.sminglershotgunsports.webs.com

Manufacturer of Custom Brass Barrel Weights for over/under, top single, and unsingle shotguns.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Wed Jul 08, 2020 6:03 pm 
Diamond Grade

Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:58 pm
Posts: 1392
Location: Oklahoma
"from a different type of steel which can withstand higher pressure."

Just an observation here for discussion... If SAAMI's Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) voluntary standard for loads hasn't changed with the advent of steel shot and steel loads are manufactured within those standards; why would the pressure from properly loaded steel shells cause any issues for barrels?

And, if the shot is encased in a tough wad there should be no contact with the barrel, hence no barrel scoring.

That said, radial pressures from a steel load at the choke constriction area (muzzle) may be an issue for some tighter constricted barrels and can cause a ring bulge at the choke or expansion of the choke tube when the barrel or choke tube aren't able to withstand the radial pressures regardless of shot type. But, these radial pressures vary and are depend the load's payload, velocity, pellet size, pellet hardness, pellet shape, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:51 pm 
Limited Edition

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:19 pm
Posts: 481
^^^ Nail head...meet hammer.

_________________
NRA Life Member


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:30 pm 
Shotgun Expert
Shotgun Expert
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:02 am
Posts: 26232
Location: Plainfield, IL
Joe Hunter wrote:
And, if the shot is encased in a tough wad there should be no contact with the barrel, hence no barrel scoring.


That ASSUMES all factory shotshells are perfect. Manufacturers make no such claim.
Image

It also ignores mandatory CIP standards for steel and Steel Proof that did not exist during the manufacture of the Model 58: http://www.shotguns.se/html/steel_proof.html .

RandyWakeman wrote:
#2 steel, even launched at 1550 fps, is less lethal than #5 lead at all ranges. A common 1330 fps #5 lead load has 2.11 inches of penetration at 40 yards. #2 steel compares poorly, with 1.72 inches @ 40 yards with a 1400 fps muzzle velocity, 1.86 inches with 1550 fps muzzle velocity.

Steel often gives similar or lesser pattern percentages at 40 yards. Even if we assume the same pattern percentage, steel sucks and sucks badly. Assuming a 65% 40 yard pattern percentage for #2 steel and #5 lead, it is a percentage of "what" that matters. Lead #5 putting 65% of its 1-1/4 oz. pattern in a 30 inch circle at 40 yards is 65% of about 214 pellets. With 1-1/4 oz. of #2 steel, you only have 155 pellets to start with.

Steel #2 @ 65% = 100 pellets on target. Lead #5 @ 65% = 139 pellets on target. To say lead is at least 40% more lethal than steel is the best available version of the truth, for you have about 40% more pellets on target and those pellets all have better penetration than steel. If you try larger than #2 steel, the pellet count suffers even more. If you go with #3 steel, the already poor comparative penetration of #2 steel gets even worse.

Steel is a miserable, horrible pheasant-crippler at longer ranges. How could anyone think differently?

The CIP is a toothless tiger, the "United Nations" of firearms. They have no direct authority, what they do have is through a complicated set of treaties that are unenforceable in large measure. Some CIP proof houses are horribly corrupt. It isn't only the United States that has a corrupt bureaucracy, far from it. If you think there is no crime in Spain and Italy, you're delusional. Guns get shipped with proof marks on them that have never, ever been fired-- where the manufacturer applies their own "CIP" proof marks, yet the gun has never seen the inside of a proof house. The Eibar proof house is a known offender, admitted to in open court, and the CIP is feckless in the matter. When was the last time the CIP successfully fined or sanctioned a gun or ammo manufacturer for violations? :shock: There is more money in big Pharma violations or working to deceive the EPA mileage standards, that much is common knowledge.

Image
Steel shot certainly can damage forcing cones and chokes. In fact, it says so right on the box of most steel shotshell loads. It is hard to miss. You use steel shot at your own risk, and while thicker plastic shot cups are designed to lessen or minimize the damage in modern shotshell barrels, they are not represented as guaranteed to do so and the shotshell manufacturers accept no responsibility for any damage to your barrel. They tell you this on every box, yet still some ask if steel can damage a shotgun barrel. Of course it can. If we don't understand the problems associated with steel, all we have to do is read Lyman's Shotshell Reloading Handbook, 4th Ed., Chapter 20. It is common knowledge, unless you've never heard of Lyman Ballistic Laboratories.

Smaller diameter steel shot (not letter sized) and moderate muzzle velocities help mitigate or at least slow down the rate of damage. Things like mylar wraps and generous over-shot wads make for better shells, but that adds substantial cost. It is never a good idea to have a pellet harder than a barrel to come in contact with a barrel. Mylar wraps are not used (they should be) simply because it cannot be done with high-speed factory machinery. It is anyone's choice, of course, and there is no guarantee of barrel scoring just like there is no guarantee of no barrel damage. Just like “when all else fails, read the instructions” it isn't a bad idea to consult the cautions and warnings printed on your shotshells from time to time. Ammo companies might hate to say, “I told you so,” but in this case they clearly have.

CIP shotgun standards abysmally low, and what purported standards there are unenforced. Tungsten shot for example, which is harder than steel, is ignored.

Image
CIP "High Performance Steel" is anything but. 355 m/s is an anemic 1164.7 fps. 36g is 1.26986 oz., and the 415 m/s is 1361.55 fps. The CIP "High Performance" notion was obsolete from its inception.

Steel shot needs a lot of velocity to work as well it can. The 1600 and 1635 fps Federal loads and the 1700 fps Remington Hypersonic loads are popular: they are well above what the CIP "High Performance Steel" spec of 1,410 fps allows for. It isn't "high performance" at all.

_________________
--Randy

http://randywakeman.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:33 pm 
Crown Grade

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:34 pm
Posts: 5371
Good grief.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:34 pm 
Shotgun Expert
Shotgun Expert
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:02 am
Posts: 26232
Location: Plainfield, IL
WOOD DUCK wrote:
I have a model 58 choked skeet -- is it safe to shoot steel ?


It isn't safe for the gun.

_________________
--Randy

http://randywakeman.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:59 pm 
Presentation Grade

Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:43 am
Posts: 540
RandyWakeman wrote:
Ravenanme wrote:
Damn I wish someone would've told me that back in 1979


No, you don't. It wouldn't have mattered.


Tom Roster did all the testing I needed to prove my guns were fine with steel shot !
With a SAAMI limit of 11500 psi and a test that went as high as 55,000 psi , it kinda
is a safe buffer zone , wouldn't you say ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:36 am 
Shotgun Expert
Shotgun Expert
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:02 am
Posts: 26232
Location: Plainfield, IL
Image
Image

See also https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/guns/ammun ... dges-25848 .

_________________
--Randy

http://randywakeman.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:16 am 
Diamond Grade

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 1039
Keep posting that same old article Randy . Notice it says don’t shoot out of fine doubles, last I knew a model 58 isn’t one. With skeet choke in that gun you are fine shooting steel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:50 am 
*Proud to be a*
*Proud to be a*

Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:22 am
Posts: 8835
Location: Rochester, NY
RandyWakeman wrote:


You're using a Popular Science article from Sept 1977 to bolster your claims? Even you admit, and EVERYONE knows, that steel loads today are worlds different than steel loads from over 40 years ago. Come on, you can do better than that...

_________________
S3 Smingler Shotgun Sports
Ian Smingler
585-613-8098
[email protected]
http://www.sminglershotgunsports.webs.com

Manufacturer of Custom Brass Barrel Weights for over/under, top single, and unsingle shotguns.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 12:20 pm 
Shotgun Expert
Shotgun Expert
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:02 am
Posts: 26232
Location: Plainfield, IL
Skeet_Man wrote:
You're using a Popular Science article from Sept 1977 to bolster your claims? Even you admit, and EVERYONE knows, that steel loads today are worlds different than steel loads from over 40 years ago. Come on, you can do better than that...


Everyone knows (or should know) that Model 58 barrels have not changed, much less improved since the 1950s. Steel loads have become faster and more abusive to forcing cones and chokes today than ever before.

There is no 1950s or 1960s shotgun that I would ever run steel through: not Browning, not Winchester, not Remington, none of them. Anyone who just doesn't care about unnecessary risk to old shotguns is free to tear them up anyway they want.

All the major ammo makers warn against it, Browning loudly warns against it, it is a good idea says no one.

https://www.browning.com/support/frequently-asked-questions/can-i-shoot-steel-shot-in-my-browning-shotgun.html

Quote:
DO NO USE ANY STEEL SHOT LOADS:

The Belgian-made A-5, Superposed, Leige, and other Belgian Over/Under models, Double Automatic, American-made A-5 and all other models not listed in category 1 or 2.


Belgian A-5's were made far longer than the Model 58, until about 1975 - 1976 . . . a solid 12 years after the Model 58 was history.

Currently (today), Teague says, "Having your gun proofed for steel shot does not mean that your gun won’t suffer damage if you use steel shot, proofing just means the barrels are safe to fire steel shot loads through. It is common, particularly on older guns, that continuous use of steel shot through barrels can cause score marks inside in the barrel and eventually lead to irreparable damage."

There is zero to be accomplished by using 2-3/4 inch steel ammo in any 12 gauge. It is totally unnecessary, un-needed, and also totally unnecessary risk. It is your stuff, go abuse it if you wish, but all ammo makers tell you that you're on your own. All you have to do is read the box. A forcing cone is not something you get at Dairy Queen.

Dentists prefer that you use steel shot, however.

_________________
--Randy

http://randywakeman.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 3:01 pm 
Diamond Grade
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 6:58 am
Posts: 1320
Location: Omaha, NE
What’s funny about this is how much effort is being put into this discussion. The short answer is “Don’t do it”. It’s pretty simple and it’s the safe answer. If you want to take chances, it’s YOUR gun, just know that you’re taking some chances and only you are to blame if things go bad. The gun manufacturer warns against using steel, the ammo manufacturer makes specific recommendations for using only in modern weapons. There’s really not much doubt.

_________________
“With age comes wisdom but sometimes age comes alone.”
-Oscar Wilde


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 3:11 pm 
Crown Grade

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:34 pm
Posts: 5371
And then there’s the common sense answer for the OP, but that would detract from the ‘measuring’ contest going on.

OP; unless you plan on bringing back market gunning, and you’re wanting to use the 58......Go ahead. There are MANY non tox alternatives to steel that would be safe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 3:38 pm 
Limited Edition

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 2:19 pm
Posts: 481
Disclaimers on shotshell boxes are the corporate lawyers' weasel words in case there's a QC issue at the plant.

_________________
NRA Life Member


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:12 pm 
Diamond Grade
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 6:58 am
Posts: 1320
Location: Omaha, NE
mea culpa wrote:
Disclaimers on shotshell boxes are the corporate lawyers' weasel words in case there's a QC issue at the plant.


Not disagreeing. They know people will do dumb things and use the wrong ammo (see original post).

_________________
“With age comes wisdom but sometimes age comes alone.”
-Oscar Wilde


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:26 pm 
*Proud to be a*
*Proud to be a*

Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 7:25 pm
Posts: 8519
Location: Louisiana
Bismuth is commonly available now, and is inexpensive and effective enough that there's no need to risk shooting steel in a vintage Remington autoloader IMO.

And don't forget, when you stop at Dairy Queen to ask for an ice cream cone, not a forcing cone. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:50 pm 
Diamond Grade

Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:58 pm
Posts: 1392
Location: Oklahoma
RandyWakeman wrote:
Dentists prefer that you use steel shot, however.


I appreciate the discussion and can attest to the above quote from experience!

Good luck!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: STEEL IN 58 REMINGTON
PostPosted: Sat Jul 11, 2020 1:21 pm 
Field Grade

Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 78
Location: clinton twp. / sebewaing mi.
RandyWakeman wrote:
WOOD DUCK wrote:
I have a model 58 choked skeet -- is it safe to shoot steel ?


No.

"Owners of Remington 12-guage Model 870, 1100, 11-87, 3200, and Sportsman 58 and Sportsman 12-A and 12-P shotguns manufactured between 1960 and June 1995 (the \"Shotguns\") who have not previously excluded themselves from the settlement are entitled to receive a payment (\"Settlement Check\"), as part of the resolution of the class action lawsuit in Garza v. Sporting Goods Properties, Inc., Civ. No SA-93-CA-1082(W.D.Tex.). "

Why not have been shooting it since you could'nt shoot lead not one problem and not just 58's but 1100's and old 870's.




Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Registered users: adirondack46r, alta7, andrewmr, Bing [Bot], birdhunter39, Bob*N, brothernov, bullseye-69, Byron Whitlock, captjsjr, chilled shot, ChrisLunker, copperboy, CZMark, Darkhorse60, DEG, dixiesetter, dubob, EricB, federal, fiddlesticks, Gard72977, geometric, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Gunroom37*, HenryVac, hopper810, ironlion, ithacanut, jacosta95, JayMc, JoM, JonnyRocket, justrob, kcmetman, krimmie, Litespeed, lossking, lsclmmr, Magic20, Majestic-12 [Bot], Malcolm7, May, mddan, Mike Foley, misterdom, moishepipick, mtm2525, nevermind, PennSkeet, powwowelll, R31grand, Ravenanme, rbshire, Researcher01, richg99, Rooster booster, Scardog7, Schnurb, scott12v, Slanski62, The Swanny, ThrowAway, willy1125, Zarkadi


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group    - DMCA Notice