March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Who's Online Now
7 members (Hammergun, Ian Forrester, dukxdog, Don Zahringer, 2 invisible), 780 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,010
Members14,391
Most Online1,131
Jan 21st, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 5 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
You could use less powder by going to 20/28 in the 28 gauge. And it's likely cleaner than 800X. Nice that it's so versatile . . . although the 8 gauge shooting community isn't real big. I've only used 20/28 in 28, 20, and 16 gauge. In the 16: 7400 psi, 1180 fps pushing 7/8 oz target load as tested by Mr. Armbrust. The 20ga load is 7200 psi, 1200 fps pushing 3/4 oz target load. I shoot the latter in a Brit 20 that was originally 2 1/2" but lengthened to 2 3/4" and reproofed.

Last edited by L. Brown; 08/19/18 06:47 AM.
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 685
Likes: 45
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 685
Likes: 45
I have a good stock of 800x as I use it for 1 1/4 oz NP BB coyote loads in my combo guns and quite a bit in small game/finisher loads in my 222 Rem, 5.6x50R, 223, 22-204 and 25-204. It was my goto powder for the 41 Mag also.

Rifle data. http://jamescalhoon.com/bee.php

I have a good stock of PB for my Bismuth and ITX loads but it is nice to know I have a backup for the future. Thanks for the write up.

I have a very old RCBS powder dump(original black paint) that throws 800x quite accurately with the pistol drum installed and set at 5gr, one pull for 5gr, two for 10gr etc. I never need to adjust it.

For my target 2 1/2" 12ga loads it is 700x(11/16 oz of 9's and 7/8 oz of 8's) and Green dot in the 16ga.

Last edited by oskar; 08/19/18 11:50 AM.

After the first shot the rest are just noise.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
I've learned more from these posts to my interests than others in a long time. Thank you.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,278
Likes: 11
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,278
Likes: 11
Originally Posted By: 12boreman
Again, can anyone show me a powder that can load 28 thru 8 gauge consistently?


The presumption being that that is a desirable state of affairs. I am unconvinced that it is even remotely possible to restrict the use of but a single powder and optimize any reload. And is that not what is touted as the rational for reloading? It's certainly not costs anymore.
Some of the above statements about wads are as well nothing less than absurd. If they were true the legal liabilities associated with the products would be incredible!

get real, people


Dr.WtS
Mysteries of the Cosmos Unlocked
available by subscription
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Quote:
"They involved the firing of many thousands of cartridges by a team of nine experienced shots of varying build, shooting under a wide variety of conditions with guns of different types, weight and boring. The cartridges were all loaded to give the same velocity to the same shot charge, though by means of powders of various rates of burning. The shooters did not know what they were firing, but were merely required to give marks for recoil. They were unanimous in assigning the lowest recoil to the cartridges with the fastest-burning powder, the dynamical effect of which was checked throughout by electric accelerometers built into the stocks of the guns, and their conclusions have since been widely confirmed." Gough Thomas, "Shotguns and Cartridges for Game and Clays", p. 155.


Larry;
Answer me one question completely "Honestly"; do you still describe this as a "Blind" test. If so then any further discussion is totally worthless. That description of nine experienced shooters firing "Thousands" of rounds through guns equipped with Accelerometers is Certainly not describing a Blind test.

If you will concede this one point then I will copy & quote this last challenge to me in a new post & give what I believe will be a meaningful answer. As long as you continue to change your stories as often as one of the "Minnesota Fats" cue balls caroming off the rails of a pool table then answering is useless. I give you an answer & you change the Question to make me "Appear" wrong, not matter what I say.


Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Well Miller . . . you ARE wrong when it comes to dynamic/measurable recoil. You don't need as much fast-burning powder to produce the same velocity with the same shot charge as you do slow-burning powder. AND THAT IS FACTORED RIGHT INTO THE FORMULA USED TO COMPUTE RECOIL. Science . . . not what anyone feels or does not feel. Thus, the slow burning powder is already starting out in a hole when it comes to recoil. I'll admit it's not a particularly deep hole, but science does show that the slow-burning powder produces more measurable recoil than a fast-burning powder. Excellent example from the Alliant website:

12ga, 1 oz load, AA hull, Win 209 primer, CB 1100-12 wad. 1200 fps. 16.9 grains Extra Lite--near the top of Alliant's fast burning powders--will get you there. Takes almost 3 more grains of Green Dot (19.8) to match it. And you're now counting on what people FEEL (or what YOU think they should feel) not only to compensate for that scientifically established deficit, but to produce less recoil with the slower burning powder than the faster burning powder. And where would we find your scientific evidence to support that belief??

As for the accelerometers, you must be assuming (and you know what happens when you ASS-U-ME) that the shooters were checking the results shown by the instruments. Why would that have to be the case? Would seem more likely to me--I admit that I'm also assuming--that a powder company employee is checking and recording what the instruments show, making sure they're working, being reset if necessary, etc. If that's the case, then the shooters don't know what they're shooting, and if they don't read the instrument, they don't know what it's recording.

But easy enough to prove you're right--if what you believe is that it's chiseled in stone that a slower-burning powder in two loads of equal shot charge producing equal velocity will produce less recoil. Show me the results of a test proving that to be the case. And if we were to hold you to the same standard that you wish to hold Thomas, then you would have had to be present at the test to verify that you have first hand information on how it's carried out and on the results.

Last edited by L. Brown; 08/19/18 05:45 PM.
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 16
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 16
I have found that 7625 gives me the best results in my 16 gauge loads - teamed with an R16 wad and Rem 209A primer in a WAA16 hull.


C Man
Life is short
Quit your job.
Turn off the TV.
Go outside and play.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Is the elaborate test referenced by Garwood corroborated by any other source?

'The Field' magazine perhaps? Anyone?

It's a very vague report notably lacking in particulars.

Far as I'm concerned without verifiable references it didn't happen.


"The price of good shotgunnery is constant practice" - Fred Kimble
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 182
Likes: 40
Sidelock
OP Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 182
Likes: 40
You are right C.Man...I loved 7625 for my 16 and 10 gauge loads. I wish to God they would bring it back! The loss of PB and 7625 was the main reason I investigated using 800X.


"As for me and my house we will shoot Damascus!"
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,444
Likes: 204
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,444
Likes: 204
Originally Posted By: L. Brown
....slow burning powder is already starting out in a hole when it comes to recoil. I'll admit it's not a particularly deep hole, but science does show that the slow-burning powder produces more measurable recoil than a fast-burning powder. Excellent example from the Alliant website:

....1 oz load....
....1200 fps....
....Takes almost 3 more grains of Green Dot (19.8) to match it....

....I admit that I'm also assuming....

....if what you believe is that it's chiseled in stone that a slower-burning powder in two loads of equal shot charge producing equal velocity will produce less recoil....

Larry, have you run the numbers, 7016.9 grains vs. 7019.8 grains? No kidding, that's not a particularly deep hole.

Anyway, you started off acknowledging 'felt' and 'perceived', why did you drop it? At the very least, can't we show the graphs 'proving' the necessarily higher pressure a faster powder needs to develop due to shorter duration, to get the same total force under the curve?

Page 5 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.094s Queries: 34 (0.065s) Memory: 0.8570 MB (Peak: 1.8990 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 01:24:31 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS