doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Replicating original 3" 12 bore load

Last year I used my grandfather's duck gun to take a few eiders and blacks. I had loaded #5 Bi and #6 ITX in plastic 2 3/4" hulls with plastic wads. This is the Cashmore I mentioned on the recent Cashmore thread and is chambered for 3" shells and 1 3/8 oz. lead.
So now I want to use fiber wads, so I figure I ought to use 3" hulls to avoid gas blowby in the 3" chambers. I've got some old 3" hulls from steel loads (used in a newer, uglier gun) and I can get new 3" plastic hulls so I can play with roll crimping, but is there anywhere I can get new 3" paper hulls so I can go whole hog?
And there is the question of powder. Historically, what powders would have been used in 3" waterfowling loads in the 1930"s? and What sort of burn rates did they have? and What sort of pressures did they develop? and What modern powders are most similar?
Judging by my grandfather's adjustable brass shot dipper, 1 1/8 Bi 5's is equivalent to 1 3/8 of lead by volume, but with the full chokes I'm thinking of reducing that to 1 oz Bi, similar to 11/4 lead. By the way, as a teenager, I was introduced to duck hunting using this gun and modern (late '70s) 1 1/4 of lead 4's loads which were very effective on the infrequent occasions that I connected. (Warning to fine gun enthusiasts with children: Teaching a young person to shoot and hunt with nice English sidelocks may permanently impair their ability to recognize worth in other guns.)
The bismuth load data in my 5th ed. Lyman's is all for heavier loads at what seem unnecessary velocities. Is there more useful data somewhere? The Hodgdon website listed only one powder which I'd never heard of.
Thanks, Sumner

DuPont 93 and DuPont Oval are mentioned by Askins in the early Western Cartridge Co. Super-X brochurs.

Thank you Researcher. I googled DuPont Oval, which led to two discussion threads you had participated in. What I gleaned from them was that the new progressive powders were introduced in shotgun loads in 1922 and enabled higher velocities with only slightly higher peak pressures by extending the period of high pressure, leading to potential failure of old twist barrels several inches forward of the chambers. Was there a change in fluid steel barrels at this time reflecting the change in powders? How long did it take for new american powders to be used in England or were the English also introducing progressive powders at this time? I can imagine conservative English barrel makers easily taking a decade to change the way they made barrels.
Any idea how DuPont Oval would compare to say 700X?

EverD,
Shooting eiders, I do not suppose you are near Amarillo, Texas, but I think that I have a few 3" paper factory loads left.

As far as roll crimping, I would get some 3.5 inch fired hulls and shorten them to 3 inch, they would roll crimp better.

BUT remember non-tox is a breed of a different cat and may take different propellants as the non-tox travels down the barrel differently than lead.

Mike

I think you're worrying for nothing about "gas blow-by".

I was told to 'back off the powder' with Bismuth shot. In my 10 ga. load I backed off 3 grains of powder from my lead load and got almost the same velocity over a chronograph along with a nice even pattern.

What jOe said..

Ever D, in England back then Shultze, Imperial Shultze and EC Number 3 powder would be the main choices. Smokeless Diamond, Empire or Amberite were also mentioned. They would have been around up until around 1960 then Eley Kynoch started using Neoflak powder in magnum and heavy loads. In the 70's it would have been Nobel 64. Nobel 82 would have been used in the 80's. All these are slower progressive powders. Lagopus.....

Mike - I think I went through Amarillo once, years ago. I'm in mid-coast Maine and haven't been out of the state for years except for Thanksgiving with the in-laws in Massachusetts, tolerable because I get 3 mornings of duck hunting out of it. How few shells do you have? I might be interested in working something out by mail. I'll ask around at the gun club for 3 1/2 inch hulls.

jOe - Were these bismuth loads matched to lead by volume or weight? The supplier of my bismuth did suggest a slow powder and low pressure to minimize stress on the shot.

lagopus - Thanks for the input. I can see a complete answer will take some research. For now I guess I'll look at something slower than 700X, I've got a bit of Universal Clays on hand, time to check the data.

I'd just buy some Kent Matrix or Bismuth Ammo and go hunting.

I'm stoking the 3" chambers of my L.C.Smith Longrange Gun with Longshot powder, 28gr., behind 1 1/8oz. #2 Nice Shot, old red W-W wads, AA hulls. Geese mind that load a lot.