Shotgun Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm still pretty new to shotshell loading, only have about 2k loaded and shot. For those 2k I've used Windjammer wads, Rem STS hulls, 18grains of red dot, 1-1/8oz #7-1/2 and a Win 209 primer. My LGS was out of windjammer wads and the guy recommended WT12 wads (WAA12 replacement) as I can still use 18gr of red dot.

Now I am getting crushed hulls almost every shell on the crimp station {F* any suggestions? Never had this problem with the windjammer wads.

Edit: just ordered more Windjammers to see if the problem continues
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
My guess would be a higher stack height with the WT12. After you drop shot and before the pre-crimp station check and see how far up the inside of the hull the shot column comes. If it is higher then the fold line for the old crimp the stack height is too tall.

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Steve Y said:
My guess would be a higher stack height with the WT12. After you drop shot and before the pre-crimp station check and see how far up the inside of the hull the shot column comes. If it is higher then the fold line for the old crimp the stack height is too tall.

Steve
The shot column looked to be below the fold line, but I'll double check
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
After doing some checking I could not find your load using a WT12 wad. I could find that load using International or WST, both denser powders then RedDot. Which leads me back to a stack height issue.

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Steve Y said:
After doing some checking I could not find your load using a WT12 wad. I could find that load using International or WST, both denser powders then RedDot. Which leads me back to a stack height issue.

Steve
It is listed in Lyman 5th (I believe) as WAA12 (the WT12 is a clone of it)

I just loaded a couple with some windjammers that I found laying around and out of those no crushing
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
Too bad you didn't compare the 2 wads side by side before you loaded the last of the windjammers.

I am by no means a "wad inter-change expert" but in Lymans 5th for the STS hull I can find loads for both the WAA12 and the WT12. In most cases the WT12 wad is used with more of the same powder or denser powders then the WAA12.

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Steve Y said:
Too bad you didn't compare the 2 wads side by side before you loaded the last of the windjammers.

I am by no means a "wad inter-change expert" but in Lymans 5th for the STS hull I can find loads for both the WAA12 and the WT12. In most cases the WT12 wad is used with more of the same powder or denser powders then the WAA12.

Steve
I'll dig around and see if I can find one stuck behind the bench
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,357 Posts
The difference is that the Windjammer has a soft section in the cushion section of the wad, that easily crushes, allowing more room for the crimp. The WT12 does NOT have such, and will resist reduction in height when crimping, thus causing the hull to give and crush.

Returning to the Windjammer will correct the problem. There are other wads that will work also, but the Windjammer is a very good, high performance wad.

DLM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
D L Marcum said:
The difference is that the Windjammer has a soft section in the cushion section of the wad, that easily crushes, allowing more room for the crimp. The WT12 does NOT have such, and will resist reduction in height when crimping, thus causing the hull to give and crush.

Returning to the Windjammer will correct the problem. There are other wads that will work also, but the Windjammer is a very good, high performance wad.

DLM
I agree, going back to the windjammers. the WT12 will stay around for a rainy day
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,394 Posts
The powder cup side may be deeper on the WJ wad than the WT12 wad giving a shorter stack height. I was told that the WT12 wad was a clone of the WWAA12 wad but made of a cheaper plastic and thus a bit cheaper to buy. I was also told that it did work as well in colder weather as the WWAA12.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,670 Posts
I've always believed the cushion area shouldn't have to be crushed and that it may cause problems latter with the crimp opening back up. In the future you may want to find a load combination that allows for just a tad of wad pressure for a good crimp. Measure how far below the top of the shell the shot is and then you'll have a base line for future components and still have a good crimp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,400 Posts
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, the fact that the load is published in Lymans (or most other publications) means almost nothing when it comes to fit. Go back through old SGW pages and you wil find this issue comes up over and over. There are a lot of published loads that just don't fit. Generally the situation is worse on AAHS hulls.

WW designs their components as a package that works together. The powder they use is pretty darned dense. Take a look at bushing charts to get an idea of this. Their wads (AA) are a tad longer than some others and the volume of their hulls a bit less. This all works fine with their powder. Red Dot is a very popular powder. But it is considerably fluffier than most WW powders. It takes up more room in the hull. In an AAHS it provides a terrible fit. In order to make it work you need a shorter wad. It usually works in a Remington hull but can be a bit tight, and a shorter wad might be needed. So, where do you find all this info on exactly fits well, what fits okay, and what takes 100 pounds of wad pressure and still bulges the crimps? As far as I know: SGW.

I do load a lot of Rem hulls with 1 1/8 ounce and I do use AA clone wads. It fits fine for me. BUT I use 17 grains of powder (instead of 18) and the powder is Promo or 700X. These are both denser than Red Dot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,400 Posts
Wad height:
Yes, they do look like the same height in the picture. But you also need to look at the cup that fits down over powder (obdurating cup.) On some wads this cup is relatively shallow and flat. On some it is rounded and dished in pretty deep. I have not used Winjammers so don't know about the shape of the cup on them, but this is another area to compare. Two wads that look the same in a side view might not sit the same height in a shell.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
albatros said:
The powder they use is pretty darned dense. Take a look at bushing charts to get an idea of this.
For those of you that don't know or understand how to use a bushing chart to figure powder density, simply go to any bushing chart and pick any mid range bushing number. Compare all the different printed powder drops. A low grain weight drop is a fluffy powder like RedDot, a high weight drop is a dense powder like 296. Just another thing the chart is good for.

Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,400 Posts
Yeah, you can load AAHS 1 1/8 ounce with Red Dot and around a #31 or 32 bushing or you can use WSH and around a #22 bushing. Both make a nice load but WSH through a #22 fits a whole lot better. In fact, it fits so well that you can load 1 1/8 ounce with a CB1100. With Red Dot it is a real challenge to pack it in with a CB1118, a 1114 works better. And, if you study the bushing charts, none of this should come as a surprise.
 
1 - 17 of 17 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