doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Heavy 16 gauge load

Miller, I shot IMR 4227 in a 10 ga. load back in the late 70s for turkeys. It was a 2 1/8 oz. load of shot propelled by 70.5 grains of IMR4227. It was a great load in warm weather, but an occasional blooper of a load in cold weather. It had a reported velocity of 1289 fps with pressure of 10,400. The wad was the 10 ga. Pattern Driver plastic wad in a 3.5" Remington hull. It was published by BP and attributed to Tom Roster but the load disappeared from the BP list of 10 ga loads in a later flyer. Gil

I did some patterning, and have shot a few wild pheasants, with the Federal 1 1/4 oz 16ga "magnum" (2 3/4"). Great patterns, but really painful to shoot paper with those things out of a relatively light sxs.

At one time, Remington offered a 1 1/8 oz load in its "Premier" shotshell line: 2 3/4 DE rather than 3 1/4. Those were good pheasant loads. The current 1 1/8 oz 16's are the 3 1/4 DE variety--and I've killed a pile of pheasants with those--including out of a pre-war Sauer that originally had short chambers (which I would never do again). In a gun with a bit of weight, pushing around 6 1/2#, and with factory 2 3/4" chambers, I'm not afraid to shoot those at wild pheasants. But they're enough for me, and I wish those old Remington Premiers were still available.

Gil;
Interesting. The 10 gauge has about 37% more bore capacity than the 16. This would put the powder charges almost in direct proportion, but a proportionate shot charge would be about 1 7/8 oz for the 10 to be equivalent to the 1 3/8 oz in the 16. 4227 is, of course, a slow burning powder as shotshells go, It has been listed for some heavy loads in the 3" .410 as well as the 3" 20. I seem to recall the 220 Max-Fire Alcan primer was considered a quite Hot primer, which was likely necessary for good ignition of this load. As Zutz was using card & filler wadding he also put that 100 lbs of pressure on the column. At the time he wrote this article the Alcan primers were gone. He recommended to anyone who might try to duplicate it to use a Federal 209M (Magnum) primer.

Something I have never seen in print but have often wondered about is; as the 52.5-grain powder charge in the 16 is only about 75% of the 70.5-grain charge in the 10 then it would seem reasonable the same primer would ignite the smaller charge a bit more reliable than the larger one.

Do you know if the 10,400 pressure you listed was actual PSI or was it LUP?
What DuPont gave Zutz on his was LUP. All things considered as the difference in gauges as well as wadding etc the two loads are very comparable, These differences could easily explain the slight differences in velocity & pressure.
Miller

I used 1 1/4 oz no 2s on hare, that was the maximum 16 ga load at the time. Otherwise I preferred 1 1/8 oz unless I found some 1 oz super cheap. This was all in 2 3/4" chambers.
Mike

Miller, the primer in the Roster load was a Fed 209 and the pressure was measured in LUP. Gil

Larry;
Back in the 1950s when I was a mere lad (Teenager actually) the normal loads for a 16 were either 2�-1 or 2 3/4-1 1/8 in "Field loads" & were available in either 2 9/16" or 2 3/4" lengths. The "High Brass" loads were 3-1 1/8 in 2 9/16" or 3�-1 1/8 in 2 3/4" length. somewhere around 1960 plus or minus a year or so, the Magnum load came out in 2 3/4" length of 3�-1�.

The vast majority of my 16 gauge shooting has been with the lighter two loads & for my purposes were always adequate. I have shot a lot more 12s & 20s than 16s over the years and for the most part used the 2�-7/8 oz or 2�-1 oz in the 20 & either the 3-1 or 3-1/8 oz in the 12. These loads are getting hard to find also unless you pay a premium.

For several years I did my quail & rabbit hunting & a bit of woodcock by happenchance with a 12 ga Damascus loaded with an oz of either #6 or #8 shot to about 1125 fps. The gun was a Birmingham p[roofed J P Clabrough sidelock with 28" barrels choked � choke in both barrels ( about .010"). Weight was a couple ounces under 7 lb & I did some of the best shooting I ever did with it.

I did do some duck hunting for a few years & mostly used the regular 3 3/4-1� load of #6 for that. I also handloaded some 1 3/8 oz loads to a lower velocity which cut the recoil some & liked them extremely well.

I don't think I would shoot a 1-3/8 oz. load in any of my 16s... they are punishing enough in my Browning Super.

There were 16 ga. 3" loads for retail sale. Dave will come along here and verify that, probably with some pics of boxes of them, soon I'll bet. I have read that they were only available in 1 oz. loading.

There is supposedly a picture of a M 21 in Schwing's book on the Model 21 that clearly shows the chamber marking as 16 ga. 3" chamber. Somebody that has the book, look on p. 67.

SRH

Stan;
You are of course correct. I can't say for certain about the 21, but for the others, they weren't "Magnums". There were also 3" 20 gauges long before the Magnum version. Nash Buckingham wrote of his father have a W W Greener hammer double in 12 ga with 3�" chambers. He used it on ducks in the 1880s as I recall but only loaded it with an ounce of shot.

Stevens had a 20 gauge pump with 3" chambers which preceded the Win model 12 seem to recall perhaps was the model 10. Up to around WWI virtually all the gauges could be had with chambers from 2�" up to about 3�" in 1/8" steps on order, with a few 1/16" increments thrown in for good measure. 2 9/16" would become a standard in the 16 & was I believe also a standard in the 14, if anything can be called "Standard" in the 14.

I have a circa 1890 10 gauge Lefever with 3" chambers, never to my knowledge a Standard for that gauge. Standards for the 10 were for the most part 2 5/8", 2 7/8" & the 3�" mag.

As you said though these early odd lengths were not for the purpose of increasing the shot load, more for better wadding lengths with standard shot & powder loads.

I have read that the longer chamberings were, originally at least, at the request of pigeon shooters who had come to the understanding of how setback on ignition damaged shot, and patterns. They surmised that more cushion wads between the powder and the shot would help this, thus more space was necessary in the hull.

If that is true it is interesting that the gun and ammunition makers were that hospitable to the requests of customers. But, we have to remember that shooting sports were a much larger component of the average American's interest than today. Results of matches were reported, and followed, with as much fervor as today's NFL or Major League events.

SRH