Shotshell self loading / shotshell info

>>33751616
You really would never be able to reload bird shot cheap enough to Make it worth it, but honestly any other kind load you would save money handloading if done right.

File: P4200121.jpg (173KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1440x1080px

First of all, shotshells are different from other kind of ammo because a big part of the "case" is a hull made of plastic or, rarely, cardboard.
While shotshell hulls made of brass do exist, they are almost a novelty and, to be honest, I never saw one.

Since shotguns have very low normal operating pressures compared to other guns, the cartridge itself is only partly made of metal (usually brass plated steel), in the bottom where the extractors work and need a secure grip.
That also spawned a number of loadings that sport various lenghts of this metal part and shooters usually categorize "low brass" shells as low power, low charge rounds and "high brass" shells as high power, heavy weight shots.

While this isn't technically wrong, because high brass shells are used in high power shots to avoid any spent shell sticking in the chamber, it's not universally a rule as even lightest, 7/8 oz. trap loadings can be into high brass hulls to have a "premium" feel and appearance.

Also the big difference between shotshells and other kind of ammo (pistol, rifle) is that they are primarily designed to hold a charge composed of a number of lead pellets instead of a shaped, aerodynamic bullet. Thus, loading them is vastly different, notably the way the shell itself is "closed" into a finished package of propellant and lead charge.

>>33751799
Eh.... it's pretty close...

I might have to run some math out on this... I mean you can get a lot of bbs for cheap on amazon...

>>33751860
Actually lead or steel bird shot of the right size would likely push the cost over the commercial shells only because of shipping cost if nothing else

>>33751860
if you count what your time is worth the only thing possibly worthwhile are precision rifle rounds.

File: aqwads01.jpg (54KB, 750x500px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 750x500px

>>33751799
Yep usually is only done because passion, hobby and the hunter's pursuit of his own satisfaction of having a self made, good hunting load. Especially in my country there are a lot of them.

- CONT.

Another different element that is not present in common pistol/rifle ammo is the WAD (or WADDING).

A wad, also called shot cup referring to modern wads, is a piece of various material, of gauge diameter, that is put between the shot charge and the propellant charge and solves two critical tasks: first, it provides a separation between the powder and the lead charge, and acts as a gas seal during the firing of the round. The other task is to provide spacing in order to have the whole shotshell hull filled to the correct height of the components, to achieve a good, tight hold of all the components inside a finished, closed shotshell.

Due to this function, there are a lot of wads of different height and shapes to resolve any combination of shot weight/shot size/ and powder charge that obviously will need a carefully selected wad height to have the hull filled to the right height before closing the shell. More on this later.

Also wads come in different materials. The most common wad used today is a single piece of plastic, having both a powder cup in the bottom, for contact with the propellant and making the first gas seal, a central "damper" section, and an upper cup to hold the lead/steel shots.
Another kind of wadding is a simple fiber wad as used in the old times, still in production today for making "old school" loadings with cardboard hulls.

>>33751919
Did some quick research, 10 pounds of #7 steel shot +20 bucks shipping that comes in close to around 20 cents for each shot load...

Theoretically you could use crossman copperhead .117 bbs and get down to 10 cents a shot load if you order enough for free shipping. Best deal I found for bulk shot from reloading suppliers on shipping was 15 dollars and that was only after hitting 50 pounds of shot.

depending on the shotshell brand though you're looking around maybe 30 to 40 cents a shot

It's a close margin but you could feasibly get below the pricepoint for birdshot if you're frugal enough.

>>33752010
we're talking about shotguns specifically though.

>>33752097
While possible to get it cheap enough I would argue that you lose quality, for example useing those cossman bbs you likely won't get a true bird shot because of the size difference

>>33752271
Considering bird shot varies from .2 ish to .1 depending on the load .117 is within the realm of possibilities.

File: IMG_20170425_005146.jpg (637KB, 1652x1239px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 1652x1239px

A wad is actually not just a simple spacer into a shell; various makers tested a lot of shapes and solutions and there is a wide selection of wads (at least here in my country) because makers always tried to have different solutions for game loads, skeet/trap loads, buckshot, etc. always trying different approaches to have good shot patterns over the various weights and sizes of lead charges.

For example, the central part of a modern wad acts, when not firing the round, as a spring to keep the powder well pressed against the primer, and the shot charge pressed against the shotshell "mouth" so it is not loose and rattling inside the shotshell.

But during the actual firing of a shotshell, the wad has the other task to absorb part of the pressure spike, by compressing itself, to avoid the undesirable effect of lead shot deformation under the "ramming" of the pressure spike.
A very stiff wad would have a number of lead pellets slightly crushed under the pressure, and deformed pellets does not fly very well once in the air, thus creating bad patterns.
This is notably true with very fine shot sizes, like number 6-7 onwards, as softer wads provide a better patterning of these loads. As a side note, softer wads also reduces inital peak pressures as they compress during the first combustion stages, and also achieve a "softer" combustion with somewhat reduced muzzle speed. Their main use is with light to medium birdshot loads where patterning is a concern over muzzle speed.
Stiffer wads on the other hand, make a powder combustion faster by compressing very little during the first stages of ignition. These wads can optimize the burning of small charge of fast powder (like in light clay loads), or help having a better combustion of powders using big shot sizes (like in buckshot loads).
While there isn't actually a "iron like stiff" or "butter like soft" wad, there are a lot of them to make better shotshells for every application.

File: 17965154_10154261324697447_835909401_n.jpg (130KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 540x960px

In australia it is the lead that kills you.
So bloody expensive.
Reloading is far cheaper than bullets otherwise.
I just use a fishing sinker mold to make #6 and it keeps cost down. (I live in the bush and there are old cars everywhere so tyre weights are in great numbers).
Can anyone tell me what type of wad would be best to keep 00 shot tight as fuck for the longest distance possible with a full choke?
Actually, can you run 00 shot through a turkey choke?
Pic is my yildiz sxs

File: cartucce-canna-liscia_r.jpg (114KB, 500x349px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 500x349px

Still on wads, one big improvement over time was the use of the shot cup.
A shot cup is a part of the wad that envelops the shot charge, usually all the shot charge but a small portion at the top, where the shotshell crimp is made.
The shot cup helps having the outer lead pellets preserved during the acceleration in the barrel, thus having less deformed pellets and better patterns. Also, provides a better seal of any escaping gas and greatly reduces the lead fouling of the barrel.

A shot cup tho, tightens the shot pattern a bit so for some kind of bird hunting, where an extremely quick shot spread is needed, "cupless" wads or the good old fiber wads still can be a better solution.

>>33752010
I wouldnt say that. I didnt like the way my shotty sprayed 3x3 00.
When i loaded my own i stacked 3, 3 and 2 (so one pellet less), and it patterned perfectly.I would rather spend more time and money and reload for better patterning.

File: IMG_20170423_233712.jpg (372KB, 1652x1239px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 1652x1239px

Finally for now (as I'm sleepy and going to bed), let's talk about the crimping, or how a shotshell is finally closed into a round.

There are actually two types of closing: using a star crimp, or a round crimp (note - I am translating how they are called in my language, your mileage may vary).

A star crimp is actually the most widespread way of closing commercial shotshells, and for good reasons.

First, it is made by folding and rolling the same plastic of the hull, so it does not need any other component, reducing costs.
Also, a star crimp is harder to unfold than a roll crimp. That means during the early ignition stages, the whole wad/lead shot charge stays in the shotshell a bit longer, thus keeping compressed the burning powder a bit longer, and so raising the peak pressure.
For ammo makers this means that a smaller charge of powder can achieve the desired pressure compared to a similar shot load, but closed with a roll crimp.

A roll crimp instead is used when is really needed, because another component to actually cap the lead shot is required. These are disks that are usually made of plastic, but cardboard and cork also are used (notably when recreating classic style, roll crimped birdshot loads).
Roll crimps are used with bigger shot sizes and buckshot, that would make a star crimp very difficult if not impossible to make right, and shotgun slugs.

Pic related.

That's it for now, if the thread will be still alive later I'd add more.

unrelated, but do you think the owner of my nearby indoor range would be pissed if I shot wax slugs?