[Buckshot68]

Well, I made it back to the reloading bench after getting an empty AA hull. After comparing it to the Super X hulls that I have, as well as the green Winchester hull and the Fiocchi hull in the photos, I can clearly see the difference! So that explains why the WAA12R wad was not working in that hull with #4 buck. Now the problem I have is Hodgdon does not have any data specifically for Super X hulls, all of the reloading manuals are out of date and I have a lot of Super X hulls! Any advice or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Also, as soon as I can find some hulls, I'll be looking for loads for #4 buck in the .410 bore.

 

[rhodesengr]

what weight and speed are you trying to load? What powder and primers do you have?

I think you should start, at least, with a listed load that specifies a hull type (tapered or straight), powder and primer that you have or can get, and weight. Then you can play around with the build to get things to fit. Changing wad will change the pressure some but if your basis load is not too close to 11500, you will have some leeway.

So, for example, in my Project Buckshot thread, I settled on two basis loads. They both use Cheddite hulls and primers, one uses 22.4gr WSH with 1.25oz lead ( #00buck) and the other uses 28gr Longshot, with 1.5oz lead (12 #00buck). I used various methods to get the build nice.

 

[Buckshot68]

I have Winchester 209 primers. I have universal, longshot and tightwad for powders. I'm going for 27 pellets of #4 buck ( mine weighs out at 1.280 ounces, so just over 1¼ ounces). If I understand correctly, if it's not a tapered hull then it's a straight wall, if that is correct then I need to get a wad for a straight wall hull. So would load data for Fiocchi or Cheddite hulls work?

 

[howa9700]

As near as I can tell from the OP's interior hull photos, the Win hulls in question are tapered. Basically, the same as AA HS hull interiors. If so, gonna be hard to find a modern era wad that lacks the large compression zone with shot cup large enough to allow that much payload. More on this below.

So you may be back to that Win AA Red wad......pile in the buckshot, then start looking at overshot cards to fill the space, or since shot is going to be running proud of the wad anyway, drop a 20 gauge nitro card in bottom of the shot cup below the buckshot. That will take up about 1/8" of space. Option B is to switch over to an overshot card and roll crimp. You can pretty much crimp anything that way.

You can do all these space test trial runs using a fired hull. Leave dead primer in place, drop in powder (won't go bang), wad (seat it lightly), then start dropping your shot and spacer combinations until shot column tops out where you need it to for a good crimp. I've even been know to replace a known volume of powder with equal volume of fake power, like walnut shell media used to tumble clean rifle brass. Hull is graveyard dead that way. Only thing you lose when cutting results down to recover components is the spent hull.

Then there is option C. Switch over to the true straight wall hulls like the Fiocchi, then use large payload capacity wads intended for non-toxic shots. Wads like the Mg42 and some of the other exotics. They have a small crush zone (or none at all) and allow a huge shot payload. The interior of the Mg42 is tapered at the bottom of the shot cup, so won't work (won't stack right) for large buckshot like 00, but may for smaller #4 buckshot. I have a couple of these options, and if time permits later today, may try 27 pellets of #4 buck in what have and see where that goes.

Whatever you wind up using, once you wonder out of bounds and start using 1 1/4 oz payloads over enough Longshot to get it moving, using such exotic combinations of components is a ticket to disaster. I wouldn't go too far down that road without getting it tested. Kinda like the difference between lady fingers, firecrackers and cherry bombs. When things go wrong, the difference is pretty dramatic.

 

[Buckshot68]

As near as I can tell from the OP's interior hull photos, the Win hulls in question are tapered. Basically, the same as AA HS hull interiors. If so, gonna be hard to find a

The picture wasn't that great, but the hull on the right was an AA HS birdshot load, 1 was a Super X 00 buck and the green 1 was a military 00 buck. The Super X and military hull look just like the Fiocchi inside except the Fiocchi is flat across the bottom whereas the Winchesters have a little nipple at the bottom at the primer pocket.

 

[rhodesengr]

The only tapered hulls (that I know about) are Rem (STS, Gun Club, Nitro 27) and the Winchester ones. Cheddite, Fiocchi, Fed Top Gun, etc are all straight wall. Most here will say you c an use loafds listed for them more or less interchangeably. That said, they do have minor difference in base wad thickness so you will get different stack heights. The Hodgdon website has data for Longshot at 1.25oz for both tapered and Straight Hulls. 1 3/8oz too for that matter. You can look at the recommended wads and see if any of them give you a decent stack and fit or look into something like the BPI FS12 gas seal. You may still have to adjust the height above the FS12 with spacers and an overcard. With my #00buck loads, I had similar builds with the FS12 and a wad with petals removed but that was needs to get layers of 3 balls with #00. I have no experience with #4 or how they fit into rows.

There is also for Universal at least in Fed GM hulls (straight) at 1.25oz also so start pouring over the Hodgden data

 

[Buckshot68]

Sounds good. I can play with spacers, but I have no experience doing that yet, so I wanted to make sure I am doing safely. So my question now is, adding spacers and over shot cards won't effect pressures? As long as I match the powder charge to the shot weight I'll be OK?

 

[rhodesengr]

Sounds good. I can play with spacers, but I have no experience doing that yet, so I wanted to make sure I am doing safely. So my question now is, adding spacers and over shot cards won't effect pressures? As long as I match the powder charge to the shot weight I'll be OK?

Other than the small amount of added mass, I can see no reason why spacers would change the pressure. I do think that changing the wad can change the pressure because there is a lot of variance in the compliance of the wad's mid-section. You could expect that stiffer mid-sections would yield a higher peak pressure. This is why I suggest choosing a listed load starting point that isn't too close to the 11500 SAMMI limit. Then you know you have some leeway. It is always a good idea to send your load off for testing when you get a build that you like.

Both BPI and Precision Reloading sell spacers and OS cards. You can use those or make your own. I do both depending on what I need. I have been making spacers with 1/16 cork sheet that I bought a a local Michaels. It measures an actual .070". You can punch our spacers and OS cards with "leather" punches that you hit with a hammer. A 5/8" punch makes spacers that fit well inside wads. If you use a gas seal or cut the petals to get more ID, I found an 18mm punch works really well. There is kind of gap in available imperial punches above 5/8. The BPI OS12 is 40mil thick and I use that in my 12-ball load. For my 9ball load, I make my own OS card with file folder paper. That stuff is 10mil thick.

You might buy the BPI Buckshot manual. There is a lot of "how to" info that talks about spacers, OS cards, liners, etc. I looked for you to see if there were any useful #4 loads but they don't have much in 2 3/4". So don't buy if for the loads unless you equate the weight of some other load.

You might look on Youtube. There is a guy with a ton of Buckshot videos including a video about #4

https://www.youtube.com/c/BubbaRountree/search?query=buckshot

This link of BPI Load of the week is all buckshot loads and looks to have quite a few #4. I tried some of the #00 loads in that link with Longshot but IMHO, they did not build very well (lumpy, out of round after crimp so would not feed in my Semi Auto). That situation would be less of a problem with #4.

Ballistic Products - Shotgunner Supplies

Ballistic Products - Shotgunner Supplies

www.ballisticproducts.com

 

[Buckshot68]

OK, thank you very much for your time and input. I like Bubba Rountree and I'm subscribed to his channel but I couldn't find much on #4 buck, I will look again though and I'll check out the BPI manual.
Thank you again for your help.

 

[rhodesengr]

I think you will like this one. Sounds like exactly what you are trying to build.

By the way, I do like using the clear plastic hulls. You can really see what is going on with your build. Things like powder migration, how much the wad compresses during crimp, and the load stack are all easy to see. I have clear hulls in Cheddite, Fiocchi, and Federal that all came from BPI as new, primed hulls. I have been using the Fiocchi ones for my trap loads for some time now.

 

[Buckshot68]

Thank you, I will definitely check this out. I like the sounds of the clear hulls, but I was trying to find a load using the hulls and wads that I already have. I guess I might have to buy some more components. Lol.

 

[870Slugger]

When you get your supplies, check in to "Steel" powder loads for buckshot.
It does for lead what it does for steel. Fast with less felt recoil.

 

[Buckshot68]

When you get your supplies, check in to "Steel" powder loads for buckshot.
It does for lead what it does for steel. Fast with less felt recoil.

I thought you couldn't interchange steel and lead load data? Anyway I don't need it fast, it's just a plinking load. Thanks for the tip though.

 

[Buckshot68]

I think I've solved the Super X mystery.... or at least a piece of the mystery. In the attached photos you will see that on the AA hull the top of the base wad is about 45mm down, the middle hull is a Super X originally loaded with 7½ lead shot, top of base wad is also about 45mm down, the hull on the left is a Super X originally loaded with 00 buck and the top of the base wad is about 60mm down. So, I'm thinking perhaps Super X hulls loaded with birdshot are the same design as AA hulls, however Super X's loaded with buck are a straight wall hull. Any opinions on this theory?

 

[rhodesengr]

I think I've solved the Super X mystery....

I think you can see the problem when dealing with commercial ammo. Sounds like you are seeing "SuperX" ammo with different hulls. The ammo companies have no responsibility to to supply consistent hulls just because they use the same brand name or ammo class. Winchester hasn't even been especially consistent with their Trap loads. You see lots of posts here and on TS about the different versions of the Winchester hulls. Federal Top Gun is found in different versions with different base wads, etc. I understand your desire to use stuff you have on hand and you can do that but you will be much more on your own.
The distinction between tapered and straight is not really super well defined either. One thing to tray would be to take samples of your hulls and cut the tube off about .5" above the bottom so you can easily see the base-wad and hull-shape at the bottom. The Remington STS or Gun Club hulls are clear example of a "tapered hull". The plastic is rounded off going from the wall to the base. Straight hulls are more squared off. Also, with most of the tube cut off you can easily check the fit of whatever wad you are trying. Place the powder cup into the shortened hull and and if you get a sloppy or nice fit.

 

[Buckshot68]

Thank you that was very helpful info. I was actually planning to cut some down tonight to get a better look at the internals.

 

[870Slugger]

I thought you couldn't interchange steel and lead load data? Anyway I don't need it fast, it's just a plinking load. Thanks for the tip though.

Yup your not supposed to.
There are published lead loads for steel powder.