Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters substituting shotshell reloading components

I've always followed the shotshell recipes strictly. If the recipe called for a Winchester 209 primer, that's what I used. If the recipe called for a Federal plastic target hull, I used that.etc…..

Recently I witness a retailer pour water in a particular hull and then transfer that water to a different hull to test if the internal volume was sufficient to handle the same load. His assumption was that the only criteria for a particular hull was internal volume. If both hulls held (closely) the same volume, then it was OK to substitute that hull for the other.

My question....what substitutions are acceptable in reloading shot shells given that I (like almost everyone else) have no way of measuring pressure levels.

I have often subbed hulls.
I never used high speed loads.
If it fit well, I loaded it.

That said, I sure can't say it's a good practice.
Just that, it's worked out for me.

I have been far more cavalier about substituting components reloading target shotshells, often well below 10,000psi. Hunting rounds are held close to recipes due to the higher pressures they produce.
Most of the problems I have encountered were back in the days when we began experimenting with "light" loads, ie shot loads below the standard 1 1/8 target load as lead became expensive, and appropriate wads were not yet available. Those problems weren't dangerous, but dirty, due to pressures that were to low for anything like efficient burns.
Further, the advent of the plastic wad made possible wider flexibility in what one might stuff into a case. This was due to the efficient seal of the plastic as compared to cardboard wads over powder charges.
The usual test, as referred to by Dillonbuck, was the quality of the crimp, if the case was reasonably filled.

The advice from loading manuals says do not substitute components. I don't and I wouldn't recommend anyone to substitute.

Yup....and I have been willing to make some exchanges to low pressure target loads....typically under 8,500 PSI but when I start making hunting loads at roughly the 12,000 PSI level I get real squeamish about substituting.

I was once told by a man on Browning's trap team that primers are primers.....load any you have on hand......well. I'm not buying that for a second. However the dealer that substituted hulls based solely on similar internal volume still has me wondering.....

Because I roll crimp all my hunting loads, I can get away with a fair amount of volume difference and still get a good crimp.....I've even put thin felt wads inside the shot cup to take up room when the shot didn't fill enough.

I think the above post by Saskfox is sage advice.....Let's hear others on this subject.

Guy at the camp had loaded some squirrel loads. He had not paid enough attention to column height, rounds had a flair at the crimp, wouldn't even chamber in a double gun.

I talked to him about needing to be extra vigilant about column height, otherwise the crimp won't work. Even different powders have different volumes. It's all gotta work. I loaded high brass loads in low brass STS cases which worked very well. My squirrel load is 1 1/4 oz #6 over 26.6 gr. Unique using an SP-12 wad, shooting a reported 1,220 fps. Crimps perfectly and has a punch. I tried that same combo in a Win AA hull just to see, and the MEC crimped it about the same as the STS hulls.

I think those type cases are strong enough for full house loads. I'm not planning to reload those after shooting them, most get lost in the woods anyway.

I spotted a tail hanging out of a tree, with my Kahles binocs, squirrel hunting in a breeze last Sat. That tail was connected to a coon. They're bad about eating deer corn, so I rolled him out with my #6 load at around 30 yds. I had a Mod choke in my Benelli. The Benelli is a comfortable gun to shoot, but I did feel some recoil with that load. That's not a low brass load...

DF

I have loaded thousands and thousands. I don’t substitute anything. Is it worth blowing the gun up, hurting yourself or someone else. I load Winchester hulls, nothing else.

If one accesses enough load data they will find a number of loads that cross boundaries. Back in the 70s Tom Roster, L.P. Brezny, and a number of others learned that all the Reiffenhauser hulls loaded the same due to internal capacity and hull flex. That was further shown to be true periodically since. The same can be said for Win AA, Rem STS and Gun Clubs.

I swap hulls regularly using these hulls and what little difference is with the Reiffenhauser hulls as I use Federal Gold Medal data as these hulls seem to be the smallest in capacity. The only hulls of this type I treat differently are the old, all plastic Activ hulls as they are very large internally. I also tend to keep pressures in the 9500 psi or lower range.

With wads, I swap within a line (example WAA and WAASL) to maintain proper stack height. This comes mostly into play with lighter shot and powder charges utilizing low density powders in Reiffenhauser cases though I have gone the other way with compression formed cases, bulky powder, and wads. The only significant difference is going to the longer wad as the shotcup tends to be shorted and the pellets may not be fully contained.

Primers I mix and match in my target loads as they tend to be lower pressures. This is with the mid and lower brisance primers such as Win, Rem, Nobel, CCI 209, Fiocchi 615, Cheddite, et al. The Federal 209A, CCI 209M, and Fiocchi 616 get used as directed as those loads tend to be at the higher pressure range. These loads also tend to get used in cold weather which is another reason for a higher brisance primer.

If one looks at it, this is not much different than metallic reloading. Brass is regularly switched between brands by volume and even different lots from the same manufacturer can change significantly. Primers are also changed by many as are bullets. The only difference is pressures for metallics can be measured to a degree with a chronograph but when wholesale changes are made, many are just guesstimatin based on experience and research. Shotshells are no different other than pressures not correlating to velocity to the degree of metallics.

Again, if one's resource data is large enough then one will see a lot of data crosses over between hulls. If one loads to low enough pressures, then the components are not as important. Much depends on the individual's comfort level and experience. I have few qualms switching shotshell components, those swapping metallics I think are nuts.

woodmaster is spot on.
Back in the mid 60's loading data was pretty thin. We did not enjoy the enormous volume of data available today.
Common sense and a little experience reigns.

High brass - Low brass doesn't really mean anything. It is just how the manufacturers differentiate target ammo from hunting ammo. The internal shape and how the wad fits is important. Stick with tested combinations to stay out of trouble.

I am curious where you got that recipe though. It is 3 grains over what Alliant recommends on their website. Not surprising you felt some recoil.

Alliant data

Jerry

When in doubt call someone. I called Alliant and found I could substitute Cheddite Primers for Remington in a certain 20 gauge load. Otherwise stick to the published data.

This is one reason i had about 8 different load manuals when i was shooting trap competitively. If one book didnt have exactly what i was looking for, i looked in another. Eventually youll find what you were looking for. If not, i suggest not substituting anything.

I see that. I'll look up the source and reply when I get home from the office.

IIRC, pressure was above 9K but speed wasn't much different from the 1,250 fps published here.

Thanks for that link.

DF


Edited to add, I tried loading a Federal case with very high brass. It stuck in my MEC sizer, wouldn't eject. I had to unscrew the sizing die and pull the case out. It's the highest brass I've seen on a shotgun hull. Pretty useless hull to reload, at least with my equipment. Chunked them.

Jerry,

I checked. I’m using a MEC #35 powder bushing which drops 24 gr Unique, not 26.6 gr. The powder charge was obviously 24 gr. I misread the data, but with #35 bushing, dropped the right charge.

This is Lyman data, shows 10,500 psi and it indicates 1,220 fps.

It’s still a potent load.

DF