Shotgun Forum banner
  • Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.

    Advertisement
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

Silver_Is_Money

· Registered
Joined
·
6,071 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
My speculation (as in guess):

Win AA-HS Hull, 28 Gauge
Win 209 Primer
Win WAA28HS Wad
13.8 grains Win 572 powder
3/4 Oz. Lawrence Magnum #9 Lead Shot (or equivalent)
~1,200 FPS

Better and more informed guesses are greatly welcomed.
 
My speculation (as in guess):

Win AA-HS Hull, 28 Gauge
Win 209 Primer
Win WAA28HS Wad
13.8 grains Win 572 powder
3/4 Oz. Lawrence Magnum #9 Lead Shot (or equivalent)
~1,200 FPS

Better and more informed guesses are greatly welcomed.
Powder may be something like Win 572, or maybe something different...the week those were loaded. Next week/next years may be different.

If they are using the same grade of shot as they use in their 12 gauge trap loads, it's better than Lawrence Magnum.
 
Discussion starter · #3 ·
A clue here comes from the Winchester announcement of 572, which includes this statement:

"Allows duplication of the famous Winchester 28-gauge AA® target load"
That largely depends on how you define "duplication". One could argue that any load that provides the same velocity, with those primers, wads, and shot weight "duplicates" "the famous Winchester 28-gauge AA® target load." And 1200 fps may not duplicate the velocity of those famous loads.
 
Discussion starter · #7 ·
In the era of the older AA Compression formed hull the factory 3/4 Oz. 1,200 FPS trap/skeet powder was 'reportedly' Win 540 (HS-6).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3200
Discussion starter · #8 · (Edited)
That largely depends on how you define "duplication". One could argue that any load that provides the same velocity, with those primers, wads, and shot weight "duplicates" "the famous Winchester 28-gauge AA® target load." And 1200 fps may not duplicate the velocity of those famous loads.
But how "duplication" is defined is not up to me in this instance. It is up to Winchester. I can only presume that they chose their words wisely.

I agree as to velocity. Velocity is dependent upon many factors, such as (not all inclusive):
Barrel length
Bore diameter
Chamber dimensions
Choke constriction
Temperature
Condition and firmness of crimp

What Winchester establishes as their baseline criteria through which to establish what is clearly a merely 'nominal' velocity is unknown by me.
 
Discussion starter · #10 ·
Dunno about the WAA28HS wad, but the WAA28CF wad you could buy over-the-shelf was not the same wad Winchester loaded in their AA28CF ammo.
Thanks! I was not aware of that.

As to the powder I will grant that wherein retail 572 must be blended and crafted to a high standard of performance factor consistency, the commercial 572 equivalent is not likely to need nearly as much time and expense and demand level consistency refinement. Winchester can monitor pressures and velocities and make a number of small changes as required on the fly.
 
Your correct. I don’t have any 572 to compare it to my Longshot but if someone does it would be interesting to see if it looks the same.
I don't see why it would look the same. It's two different powders and cannot be loaded the same.

Even though a particular bushing throws the same weight of each powder, identical reload data shows distinctly different amounts of powder when using Longshot and 572.

For an identical 1200 fps target load, with identical components except for powder, the Longshot load uses a bushing two sizes larger than 572.

That's a significant difference.
 
Discussion starter · #16 · (Edited)
I haven't made my purchase of a 28 gauge Mec 600 Jr. yet, but for Skeet and some Sporting Clays I'm settling in on this as my load:

Win AA-HS Hull, 28 Gauge (chosen for its reloading longevity)
Ched. CX2000 209 Primer (chosen because it's all that can be found right now)
13.9 grains Win 572 powder (nominally what should fall from a MEC bushing #13)
Claybuster CB5034-28HS Wad (chosen over the WAA28HS Wad due to both cost and availability)
3/4 Oz. Lawrence Chilled #9 Lead Shot (standard MEC 302034 charge bar, not the SS model)

My main concern at this end stage juncture is: Will this combination provide for adequate column height within the AA-HS hull for a good and proper crimp, with neither crimp caving, nor hull buckling? Need your advice here. I'd hate to commit to all of this and have it be a bad mix of components.

Lastly: What wad pressure (if any) should I adjust the 600 Jr. for with this combination?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wazman
My main concern at this end stage juncture is: Will this combination provide for adequate column height within the AA-HS hull for a good and proper crimp, with neither crimp caving, nor hull buckling? Need your advice here. I'd hate to commit to all of this and have it be a bad mix of components.
Yes this is a good load. Stack Hight is correct.Claybuster redesigned the CB5034HS wad some time ago. It is designated as HS5034HSB. Unless someone has some really old stock(10ish +years or more). You will be getting the"B" verson.Note: the B version is an exact copy of the winchester wad and allows the use of more bulky powders like Unique.
Lastly: What wad pressure (if any) should I adjust the 600 Jr. for with this combination?
This can be a little hard for some to understand. The actual end result wad pressure is Zero. But for the trapped air to escape the scale will read 40 ish psi. Then drop down to zero/10 psi reading.
 
Discussion starter · #18 ·
Has anyone velocity and pressure tested the current factory issue 28 Gauge Winchester AA-HS #9 shot at 1200 FPS Skeet load offering, which carries the manufacturers SKU number 'AA289'. I'm mainly interested in what the 'nominal' PSI pressure is for this specific factory load.
 
Using an Oehler 35P. Out of a Browning 725 with 32 inch barrels. Average velocity 1267 fps. If I used a Pact 1XP with infrared sky screens. It test 1262 fps. My reloads using Unique are within a few fps.
Its factory ammo I am not worried about pressure.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts