doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Long Range Hyperbole

These are the shells I have, and the gun they would be patterned with.



32" HE Fox, 3" chambers, original chokes.



SRH

Stan,

If you do so please record the muzzle velocity and air temperature, if possible. There is a chance that over the years that the powder and even the primer may have deteriorated. Any other thoughts of this?

Also, could the fiber wad have hardened over the years and provide less cushioning?

Certainly patterning results would be great. I'm just considering the possible variables.

Mark

Now that is a neat picture. Can we photoshop Nash and Marse Henry into the picture?

Wonderful Stan and thank you!
The cover of the Super Fox booklet shows a pattern of 59% in a 30� circle at 60 yards with No. 4 shot using Western 3� Record Super X shells.
Hunter Arms' �The Wonder Gun� booklet claimed full choke patterns in a 30� circle using a 3� shell and No. 4 shot (188 pellets) of 92% at 40 yards, 45.2% at 60 yards, and 29.2% at 70 yards.
I would suggest 3-5 shots at 60 and 80 yards.
Mark's point is important. I believe Mike Campbell spoke with Tom Armbrust about pressure/speed testing some vintage loads he had. Tom had already attempted to do so, and found the results quite inconsistent; he thought related to primer rather than powder deterioration. Some shells had increased pressure secondary to hardening/stiffening of the wads and paper cases.
We all understand that a few shots from one gun and one load does not a statistically significant study make, but the results should be interesting. I suspect pattern distribution will be a problem with lots of duck size holes.

To set up a controlled test which would strive to duplicate a certain Super X load of decades ago the following would be needed:

1. Original Lubaloy shot, assuming that it would be of the same material properties as when loaded into rounds those decades ago.
2. Wads that would replicate the cushioning effect, hardness, and friction against the barrel wall. The last probably isn�t significant.
3. Paper cases that would replicate the pressure absorbsion of the original cases. This would contribute slightly to the pressure curve.
4. Progressive powder with burning rate of that of the original loads.
5. Muzzle velocity equal to that of the original loads.

As Eightbore surmised, components and loads of the years since the Super Fox and Super X shells were introduced have been greatly improved. It may be hard to replicate the exact Super X load of certain years in its continued development. It would however not be hard to surpass the incredible for the time performance of the Super Fox � Super X combination!

Toward the above statements, I regularly drop doubles (with 1 shot if they are close enough together) of Canada Geese touching down into decoys over my pond at measured distances of 60-70 yards using a 2 & 7/8� short 10 gauge. Oh, I share the fun with many desreving Parker's and Elsie's in my herd. The load I use is 1 & 3/8 oz Nice Shot, SP-10 wad with 16 gauge fiber filler wad, and in early season, 4756 powder. I�ve done the same with a Super Fox and a 12 gauge Parker Damascus 34� using and factory Kent TM #1 and #3 shot. The increased hardness of the Nice Shot and Kent TM contribute to the effectiveness of these loads. Add to that the plastic "cushion" for the shot and whatever changes there are in the power buring rate. Together, those factors provide long range performance!

Something interesting would be to use modern loads in the old guns and determine the theoretical killing range (3 hits in the vital area with 6(?) FPE per pellet. Someone please advise me one the killing energy needed if I am incorrect.

With today�s loads our vintage SxS fowling pieces may indeed be able to kill at 80-90 yards!

Those look like immediately after WW-II vintage shells, as pictured in the 8th and 9th editions of the Western Ammunition Handbook.

I have shot, photographed, and analyzed a couple of hundred shotgun patterns. I used the "Shotgun Insight" program to do the analysis.

While the concept is simple the actual time in getting a statistically signifigant number of patterns through the entire process is very burdensome.


Best,


Mike

Do you think the load would be any different than the original loading, when they were introduced?

I may have some W/W Record shells, too. If so, I will pattern a few of them as well.

SRH

The earliest Super-X shells would have been loaded with DuPont Number 93 as the Super-Fox brochres mention or a progressive burning powder that Western produced themselves as their literature of 1922 suggests -- "Guided by our experience obtained in manufacturing propellant powders at our smokeless powder factory during the war, we successfully developed and applied progressive burning powder to shotshell ammunition for the first time in the history of the industry, resulting in offering to the public the Super-X load." The earliest style Super-X box for the 2 3/4 inch load in a Field shell --



When they brought out the 12-gauge 3-inch Super-X load it was put up in their Record shell --



As I said above, these early shells would have had a regular nitro card overpowder wad and normal wads between that and the chilled shot. Then by July 1929, you got Nash's beloved Lubaloy (Copperized) shot for extra cost over the regular chilled. Then circa 1931 Non-corrosive priming was added. Between April and September 1932, the Seal-Tite wad was introduced, replacing the conventional wads. By March 1934, the one-piece box. By March 1935, the Super-X was in its own steel-locked shell with a Super-X headstamp rather than the Field headstamp, but 12-gauge 3-inchers were still in the Record shell.





By 1947 Western has added the Seal-tite base wad and replaced the over powder card wad with the Super-Seal Cup Wad. By 1948 the Super-X shell has the Super-Seal crimp. Jim, I see your post WW-II box shill has RECORD between the top of the X on the face of the box.

Thanks, Dave, that's quite a collection of boxes and information. The last shells John Olin shipped to Henry Bartholomew for the Bartholomew and Buckingham Becker Foxes were dated November of 1948, the month that Nash lost Bo Whoop. I assume that the 1 3/8 ounce Lubaloy shells that Tom Kidd posted pictures of on one of these sites recently were also November 1948 shells, because his came out of the same garage that mine came out of, the Bartholomew digs in Fort Washington. I'm not ready to open the sealed case yet, but maybe Tom Kidd would donate a few shells for a patterning experiment, maybe out of one of Nash's or Henry's Beckers. I was ready to open my case and spread the wealth until a poster on one of our gun sites trashed the provenance. I may do what previous owners of Buckingham-Bartholomew Lubaloy shells have done, shoot them at ducks.