Shotgun Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,276 Posts
Moke ,

As always you have the answer.

Some day I'll learn, but it doesn't look like it will be any day soon.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,276 Posts
Rastoff,

They are basically the same. The 2 on the right seem like they have sealed off better. The top of the obturating cup on those wads are the same diameter as the the obturating cups on the left. The skirt is larger in diameter on the wads on the right so the upper part of the wad never touches the bore and stay clean.

The wads on the left probably don't seal worth spit, I can't believe they were actually made that way. If you want a short thick obturating cup to expand and seal properly you can't give the cup a domed powder side. It has to be made flat and the portion that seals has to have the gas pressure push outward at right angles or nearly right angles to the bore. That is how and why the Gualandi, Federal and Remington SP style wads work.

If you really look close you can see the soot on the left hand wads from blowby, the wads on the right are picking up debris from the bore.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,276 Posts
Moke,

Helarco wads are second rate at best. There have been problems with them, and you have been one of the posters. That Claybuster wad can't decide what it wants to be, it still isn't a very well thought out wad at the powder cup end.

Put up samples of well designed wads and the skirts will be as thin if not thinner than the Gualandi wad. I like and use Gualandi's in the 16 gauge they are a good wad.

There are a lot of well designed wads. But guys that are good with plastic molds aren't always good at designing wads. Ever notice, when one of them doesn't make an actual clone, there is a reasonable chance there are problems with the wad.

Just remember, you get what you pay for.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top