ClemFandango
-
Posts
987 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
PW Shop
Posts posted by ClemFandango
-
-
Wow. Thanks for all your replies guys.
I have seen the facility at Clay and Game for testing and intend to use it but I didn't want to be just stabbing in the dark.
If there was a more comprehensive loading resource than what I have seen I was hoping that with a bit of research I could work up a load, get it tested by C&G and then pattern test etc etc.
I'll give C&G a ring and have a chat with them too.
4 hours ago, cookoff013 said:i test before i do anything, its just normal for me.
a test barrel tests pressure. but what is not discussed what shells need to be tested. if you guys didnt realise, before i did my massive nontoxic i actually tested the shells beforehand in a short experiment assay. then i did my massive nontox project. so i could theory fire any payload from 25g steel to 36g lead and 36g tungsten etc.
test barrels tell truth. they never lie. in an ideal world we`d test charges of powder up untill the stats or pressures go bad. but thats expensive. i also learned that powders really perform well when they have a lot of resistance on them (ie maximum payload). to reduce the variability at either end of the assay, keep the powder charge within 10% of the manufacturers optimal.
it also good to get alot of data to see where or what range it performs in. and just use that really. incidently that assay test with all the nontoxics actually give out alot of secrets that you guys dont realise. i used a single powder charge and changed the payloads by using the different density shot in the same (steel rated wad, mind).
this was an test assay to see the pressures, and to see how well the power is extracted and see how much power is avilable. also i thew in some loads to test to extract all the energy to see how much power is available for that charge, and therefore how much energy per grain of powder. there will be a write up at somepoint. but the bang has always fascinated me. i tried and partially succeeded in de-bunking a few myths, (i think) . there were a few enlightening facts, and powder really is funny stuff. armed with this info, i can make a very educated guess with that powder and payload. i also think i can apply the same concept like getting a cartridge like for like with nontox, and then re- test.
it helps me investigate loads. and i got a good idea where i`m at, i could probably bang out a few decent nontoxic shells cheaper than using alliant steel in obscene quantities to shoot bonkers speeds at rather large pressures.
i can say that clay game helped because i was able to buy in very economic quantities, i managed to buy enough tungsten for small proof runs.
Sounds fascinating. I look forward to seeing your write up.
-
Hi gentlemen.
I am coming back into loading for my 10 bore after a fairly lengthy period of not really doing much.
In the past I just took my loads from data books like Lyman and BPI.
more recently and perhaps more frustrating is downloading data from clay and game for loads with components they don't hold in stock.
What I want to know is how are these loads developed? Often these manuals mention a load that looks great but one component or another is unattainable. Is there a resource that I can use to work out the effect on a load of swapping one wad for another, one case for another, adjustment of shot sizes and weight of charge, addition or omission of buffer, or even substitution of powder types?
I have just seen a post in another thread by cookoff where he has estimated the pressure of a load given by another forum user, is that from some clever calculation?
there must be some science/maths behind developing the loads that go into these reloading manuals, can anyone recommend a book etc that explains how to work up a load or the effects of tinkering with already developed loads?
Thanks in advance.
-
7 hours ago, motty said:
I have a Kestrel 10. It has in tact chokes. I have fired a few Rhinos etc through without bother. I do wonder if some weird home loads have been used in some guns. I would imagine a 42gm load of steel F @ 1600fps would not do a fixed choke 10 too much good.
Exactly, that's why I am considering having my kestrel bored out to try steel or maybe even hevi-shot loads.
-
12 hours ago, motty said:
I think that is the generally held belief, though it is a bit of a myth. A gun doesn't necessarily need to be steel proofed in order to use steel. I bet almost all guns would pass the test. I also believe too tight a choke is difficult unless you are being silly. I must admit to being cautious with my fixed full/full choked non steel proofed o/u ten. The biggest steel pellets I have put through it are 4mm 1s.
I suppose proof is basically a certification that a gun has once stood up to a particular pressure under test conditions.
I would have thought you can get away with more through a 10 bore than a 12 as the diameter of the barrel would lead to less constriction of the shot column and therefore less pressure in the barrell but i'd happily be told I am wrong.
That said I spent quite a bit of time looking for a second Gunnark Kestrel (or Greylag) 10 bore earlier in the year as I had intended having the chokes on the one I have now opened out but I wanted the option of having a full and full gun for where I still use lead. I looked at several and the barrells on them were bulged just below the choke, I assumed that this was people putting heavy steel loads through them.
-
25 minutes ago, motty said:
The main advantages as I see them, are the increase in pellets per ounce versus lead (for multiple strikes) and the non deformation of the pellets, meaning no fliers and good patterns. The last point is also probably equally true for tungsten matrix and hevi shot etc.
Thanks for the response.
I assume that the increase in pellets per ounce is because steel is less dense but does this mean more pellets in the cartridge? surely they still occupy the same volume as lead pellets of the same size but don't have the density so the trade off is that you either have to increase shot size or chamber pressure to increase speed.
I think the increased pressure is the issue with damaging guns in that people shoot a steel magnum cartridge through a gun that isn't proofed for that or through too tighter choke causing barrel bulging, but that's the fault of the person not the cartridge.
1 hour ago, Paul1440 said:2 of the Wildfowlers in the north who have shot stefl through their autos have had damage due to steel.
1 has has to scrap theirs as the action developed stress fracture. The other has damagdd choke (this one I've seen) the barrel has expanded although not by very much and it's hard to spot. However the choke tube won't fit into the barrel on my gun which is the same.
These were older 3" non steel proof guns using HP loads. Perhaps using the standatd steel would have been ok but there's a warning in there somewhere.
both of those issues are improper cartridge choice for the gun.
it's like shooting a 3 inch cartridge through a 2 3/4 inch chambered gun.
it's not the fault of steel cartridges really, it's more the fault of the person who put a steel magnum load in a gun that wasn't proofed for it.
-
9 hours ago, motty said:
The use of steel gaining pace? Not sure. It is a requirement for non toxic shot to be used on wildfowl in England, and steel is the cheapest. Some people use it on pigeons, too, as it is very effective. It has its advantages over lead, but also some disadvantages. It is also suitable to be used in probably 95% of all guns in circulation. I will not accept that steel shot ruins guns. I have not read a single post from anyone on this site that has reported such damage to their guns due to steel shot usage. Strange, don't you think?
I wouldn't want to "trash" any sportsman. I can't see how that could be implied.
I don't shoot a lot or any steel, since the lead ban I have mostly used Tungsten Matrix for my wildfowling as I got a HEAP not long after it became available.
Pity because if I's have just kept it all and sold it now I probably could retire... Anyway, it's running out and I am looking into loading other types of shot, so this is a genuine question, you mention that steel has benefits over lead as well as disadvantages, what, in your opinion are the advantages?
-
and illegal obviously.
-
3 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:
I think you may have missed the biggest problem with the Member of Staff's reply that the 36 was the powder in the cartridge!
That's what I was eluding too. It would be a rather large bang wouldn't it?
-
Oh dear oh dear.
to be fair a cartridge loaded with 36 grams of powder would make a bigger bang than one loaded with 30 although I am unsure if the shooter would be aware?
-
Crikey! I didn't see all the rest of this thread until I just posted my last reply to KB1.
I would be interested to see what law refers to the disposal of misfired ammunition, purely for my own interest, I may even look into it myself when I get time.
other than that I was being pedantic for the sake of discussion and debat but I can see the thread has escalated and I don't want to fan the flames so I'll not post again on the subject.
-
1 hour ago, KB1 said:
"which I would have said is safe…" That was your statement.
If the law states it is illegal to bury misfire's then it removes any subjective interpretation of how you deem burial of that round to be safe……..
Do YOU think BASC have got it wrong, and that they DO NOT understand the word 'Illegal'???????
Yes or No????
yes, it makes it illegal to bury a misfired round. That's all it does. It doesn't remove any subjective interpretation of what is safe and what is not.
as per my previous examples.
-
21 minutes ago, Mice! said:
Do i win a prize ? Probably happens a lot but not all the birds are tagged up.
is being able to be smug a prize?
-
1 hour ago, KB1 said:
It doesn't what?
As to what specific law, I haven't got a clue
I assume that your referring to the third person is me Ive now passed the onus onto BASC
You so want me to be wrong……… I can feel your pain TC
it doesn't remove the subjective nature of what one person deems safe practice.
-
20 minutes ago, Fisheruk said:
I just use a standard Food Saver. Works well for me. I’ve got two. One at home and one in Wales.
I had one of these, cost me about 30quid. Lasted probably 3 or 4 years of pretty heavy usage.
It drew a good vacuum and produced a good seal.
I upgraded when it finally died to a Lava machine that cost £200 ish. Great machine, double sealing strip instead of one, draws a better vacuum faster but if I am honest the food saver was all I needed. The Lava is more of a pro job.
-
1 hour ago, KB1 said:
I posted that it was illegal based on what I had been told many years earlier, and when I googled it and found that it had been confirmed on the BASC website, quite honestly, that was enough for me not to pursue clause such and such; sub section blah blah blah…….. Anyway, having a law that prevents live ammo being buried in the ground seems to me to be a sensible one, as it removes the subjective nature of what one person or another deems as safe practice when disposing of such.
well, no, it doesn't, it just makes it illegal to push it into the mud or bury it, which I would have said is safe...
It doesn't stop me throwing it in the sea, posting it to the police, taking it to bits, putting it back in my gun and trying to shoot it again etc.
It's pretty academic I suppose but I am curious what law covers it, i.e. is it firearms law or disposal of hazardous material or both or neither?
-
22 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:
Really, for a single misfire?
I've never seen anywhere in law where it specifically states how to or rather not to dispose of a misfired cartridge.
I'd be interested to though.
-
18 minutes ago, FOXHUNTER1 said:
Hate to think how many pheasants get pricked on a driven day and not picked ?
I have seen guns shooting at high ducks that you would struggle to hit with a rifle and when asked "Why " the reply is " well you might as well have a go "
That boils my ****! I had a gun pointing and shouting at me on a shoot last year to shoot at ducks over my head that were 80yards plus up there.
I shouted back that they were out of range so he had a crack. muppet.
-
seems steep to me but...
I haven't seen the place.
I pay a little over 300 for acres and acres of foreshore.
-
5 hours ago, silver pigeon69 said:
i know,(it was tongue in cheek) i should have put a laughing emoji at the end!
maybe i need counselling and a safe place i can go when i don't agree with what people say! (putting a laughing emoji
)
Ah. That makes more sense now.
-
Not tried it myself but I know a few who have and have seen reviews elsewhere.
all very positive. Hopefully the weather is good for you.
-
8 hours ago, silver pigeon69 said:
According to teachers they "work" during the school holidays??? If so, why not strike during the school holidays???
Edit: Or have the "insect" days (training days???) during the holidays??
defeats the object of a strike entirely.
-
15 minutes ago, Ricko said:
Teachers don't make the decision to close schools, that is done by headteachers and local authorities.
Tuesday, no kids in, so I sat and marked books, planned lessons and produced resources, left school at the usual time.
Wednesday, the decision was made to send kids home at lunchtime, as it's a special school our pupils are transported by local authority approved taxis, I spent the afternoon driving kids home in a minibus as their taxis couldn't get in.
Thursday, no kids in, so I spent the morning with the caretaker shovelling snow and spreading grit, then spent the afternoon mentoring younger staff
Friday, 1/4 mile from work a large bough was blocking the lane, took the chainsaw out of the back of the Frontera, sliced and diced the branches to clear the road, got into work on time and tortured the kids with Algebra
You see! It's you bloody lazy teachers that are ruining this country...
When I was a lad in the 1920's our teachers worked so hard the heat from their brow melted the snow before it even fell!
Then we'd have one big lesson in the school hall about common sense, but there's no such thing as common sense any more because of gays and America.
-
On 28/02/2018 at 17:47, walshie said:
I've got an equally short word. Not PC though.
****?
-
27 minutes ago, Walker570 said:
Does that remind me of aching right arm. My grandmother used to make almost all of our butter during and just after the war, late forties early fifties. Grandfather would bring high butter cream milk straight from the cow and tip into wide topped shallow pansions. The cream would float to the top and I had to hold the bowl whilst she skimmed the cream off with a shallow scoop about 6 inches across which had drain holes which the cream wouldn't go through. Then into the kitchen and pour the cream into a butter churn. There was a big one, like a small wooden barrel, but she would use a glass one with a geared paddle arrangement turned by a handle at the side. My Job. Not too fast and not too slow and eventually it would 'turn' and small globules of butter would show on the inside of the glass container, then it was important to turn it just so and she would take over and eventually as described above it would all...
congeal, I suppose would fit.....pour off the whey and then out with the butter pats and base mold. The pats were wooden and ridged about 9 inches by 4 inches. The base had a cow engraved in the surface and the butter was pressed and patted until all signs of liquid was gone. It would then be taken back down into the cold pantry and left to sit awhile, eventually turned onto a platter and the shape of the cow would then show on top. Home made butter takes some beating, but better still straight from the cow.
Lampwick that looks superb, well done.
awesome post.
Lancashire, Merseyside, Greater Manchester and Cheshire Squirrel Initi
in Other Pest Control
Posted
Grey squirrels didn't evolve alongside pine martens, as such aren't equipped as well as red squirrels with their predation.
Greys spend far more time on the ground than reds where they are vulnerable to Pine Martens, the presence of Pine martens mean they spend less time on the ground therefore aren't as successful at feeding, don't reach optimum bodyweight and breeding success is then reduced.