Shotgunforums.com banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
As a very inexperienced shotgun shell re-loader (i.e., I have yet to load my first shotgun shell) I understand, from what I've read, the importance of not deviating from established load data... and, specifically, I do understand the potential danger of changing load weight.

However, the load data I've seen, while it specifies load weight (e.g., 1 oz., 1 1/8 oz., etc.), it does not specify load size (e.g., 7 1/2 oz., 8 oz., etc.). Can I safely assume, then, that shot SIZE makes no difference?

I question this because it seems to me that a smaller size shot will have a greater density than a larger size shot and, as a consequence will take up less space in the hull. Does some kind of spacer need to be added to compensate for this? If so, how does one determine the thickness needed, and where/when does it get placed in the reloading process?

I currently have 2 3/4", twice shot Remington, 7 1/2, hulls that I would like to fill with No. 8 shot if it is safe to do so.

This is my first time posting on this forum. So, thanks to anyone willing to respond.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
381 Posts
Density differences for 7 1/2 to 9 shot won't make a difference. That being said, you still need a scale to weigh your loads (both powder and shot charges).

Also, just because a load is listed in a manual/online does not mean that your stack height will be perfect either. They usually work out, but I have had some that didn't quite work.

What load are you looking at making...ie. hull, powder, wad, shot charge, etc.?

Good luck and all the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
However, the load data I've seen, while it specifies load weight (e.g., 1 oz., 1 1/8 oz., etc.), it does not specify load size (e.g., 7 1/2 oz., 8 oz., etc.). Can I safely assume, then, that shot SIZE makes no difference?

You're correct, shot size makes no difference.

I question this because it seems to me that a smaller size shot will have a greater density than a larger size shot and, as a consequence will take up less space in the hull. Does some kind of spacer need to be added to compensate for this? If so, how does one determine the thickness needed, and where/when does it get placed in the reloading process?
Smaller shot will have a greater density than larger but it will take up the same space in the hull as it is metered by volume, not by weight.

Thus, #9 shot will weigh out heavier than #7-1/2 for instance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
To Flash:
Thanks for responding to my obvious "beginner's questions".

Since, as you say, "#9 shot will weigh out heavier than #7-1/2", do I need to compensate by decreasing the volume of the #9 shot so I don't increase the load weight beyond the weight stated in the loading data? Or, is the volume difference small enough that it doesn't matter? Or, do shot bushings provide the compensation needed?

To jwsmith1959:
Thank you, too, for replying.

The load I'm looking to make is:

Hull: Remington Premier STS Plastic Case
Powder: Clays
Charge: 16.5 Grs
Primer: Fed. 209A
Wad: Remington Fig. 8

To SteveY:
Thanks for the cautionary recommendation. I understand reloading slugs is different that shot. I don't know how, but I have read that it's different. At the moment I'm trying to get my brain wrapped around safe, target loads.

To packrat:
Thanks. I'm getting the impression, from the responses I've received, that the difference between #7 1/2 and #8 shot are not significant enough to make a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
To Flash:

To packrat:
Thanks. I'm getting the impression, from the responses I've received, that the difference between #7 1/2 and #8 shot are not significant enough to make a difference.
Now yer catch'n on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
To Flash:
Thanks for responding to my obvious "beginner's questions".

Since, as you say, "#9 shot will weigh out heavier than #7-1/2", do I need to compensate by decreasing the volume of the #9 shot so I don't increase the load weight beyond the weight stated in the loading data? Or, is the volume difference small enough that it doesn't matter? Or, do shot bushings provide the compensation needed?
No, you don't need to decrease the volume. Shot bushings are set up in such a way that the only way you're going to get a given weight of shot is by using chilled #9 shot and even then it may be a bit light. All larger shot sizes are going to be less than the given weight the bushing is supposed to throw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
No, you don't need to decrease the volume. Shot bushings are set up in such a way that the only way you're going to get a given weight of shot is by using chilled #9 shot and even then it may be a bit light. All larger shot sizes are going to be less than the given weight the bushing is supposed to throw.
Okay... so, shot bushings are based on # 9 shot (I didn't know that) and any larger size shot put through them will result in a slightly lower weight, which will not be a problem. That makes sense to me.
Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Okay... so, shot bushings are based on # 9 shot (I didn't know that) and any larger size shot put through them will result in a slightly lower weight, which will not be a problem. That makes sense to me.
Thanks!
Not only are they based on #9 shot, they are based on pure lead shot. Today we add antimony to it to make it harder (magnum) so its lighter. I have never counted, but in theory the number of individual pellets in a shot drop is the same as it was when it was pure lead it just no longer weights what the bar claims it should.

Steve
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top