STEEL SHOT-What you need to know

[wymberley]

 

 

 

The system needs simplifying, backing up with more than guesses and clearly printing on the boxes (with clear English) in the case of factory loaded shells. Its like all this 1370 Bar rubbish 99% don't understand what it means and the remaining 1% or so only know their shells likely pressure in PSI. Its actually a drastic overload for proof testing.

 

 

 

 

 

Proof is of course an over load test 1370 Bar is about double the pressure of a fairly pokey shell

 

 

 

 

Should anyone not understand this Bar "rubbish", then multiplying the figure given by 14.7 will give you the figure for the pressure in pounds per square inch. It just happens that the pressure in Bar is approximately the same as that given by Kg/cm2.

 

Reading Bill Harriman's '100% Proof' on the BASC website and Table 2 in particular, it will be seen that the 'mark up' of proof pressure over service pressure was historically some 160%. The improvement in fluid power measuring systems has dramatically altered the accuracy of the test results. As a result, the belt and braces historical approach can now be more finely tuned. However, as it is necessary to cater for any cartridges which are loaded to the maximum permitted service pressure, the proof pressure must be set at a figure to cater for that. Consequently, an 'overload of some 125% (130 in the case of the 1370 for the HP 1050) cannot by any stretch of the imagination be defined as "drastic" and neither can it be described as "double the figure of a fairly pokey shell" when the necessity is to cater for the maximum possible load service pressure.

[kent]

Well previous to these posts I looked up the conversion. Now I either got the wrong info for converting on the net or you have coz I got 1370 BAR equating to 19,870 psi (which is double a fairly pokey shell) Don't even talk about Kg because we also have LUP knocking around!

My point remains " its confusing and meaningless to the shooter". I shall check up the correct conversion with a friend who is correctly qualified in the field. My appologies IF I gained the wrong info initially, though it backs up my point don't it just?

[wymberley]

Well previous to these posts I looked up the conversion. Now I either got the wrong info for converting on the net or you have coz I got 1370 BAR equating to 19,870 psi (which is double a fairly pokey shell) Don't even talk about Kg because we also have LUP knocking around!

My point remains " its confusing and meaningless to the shooter". I shall check up the correct conversion with a friend who is correctly qualified in the field. My appologies IF I gained the wrong info initially, though it backs up my point don't it just?

No need to bother with your friend as I'm pretty well qualified as it happens. It just depends on how much of a pedantic geek one wants to be. Until they messed about with the units c1982, a Bar was 14.7 psi - or something akin to 14.695. This as you indicate was then changed to the new 14.5 ish figure, although one atmosphere remained at the 14.7 level. I'm so old I'm still working in Imperial. On that note, I had to get my head around decimal currency, so I don't see the point in talking about psi as that really does confuse the issue.

 

I didn't want to write a thesis so did not mention that as can be seen from my previous posts, I agree with you entirely regarding the current state of confusion - it needs sorting.

 

Bars it is so Bars we should use (yep, I'm guilty as well, but added the Kg/cm2 because of the 1979 gun mentioned in the thread). Now, a fairly pokey HP steel shell can by definition have a service pressure of 1050 Bar. The CIP standard 'overload' proof pressure of some 25% brings the proof up to c1320 which by my reckoning is some 75% short of double as is the 1370 level already mentioned which is c30% and still 70% short of double.. See if your friend agrees.

Edited September 12, 2013 by wymberley

[kent]

No need to bother with your friend as I'm pretty well qualified as it happens. It just depends on how much of a pedantic geek one wants to be. Until they messed about with the units c1982, a Bar was 14.7 psi - or something akin to 14.695. This as you indicate was then changed to the new 14.5 ish figure, although one atmosphere remained at the 14.7 level. I'm so old I'm still working in Imperial. On that note, I had to get my head around decimal currency, so I don't see the point in talking about psi as that really does confuse the issue.

 

I didn't want to write a thesis so did not mention that as can be seen from my previous posts, I agree with you entirely regarding the current state of confusion - it needs sorting.

 

Bars it is so Bars we should use (yep, I'm guilty as well, but added the Kg/cm2 because of the 1979 gun mentioned in the thread). Now, a fairly pokey HP steel shell can by definition have a service pressure of 1050 Bar. The CIP standard 'overload' proof pressure of some 25% brings the proof up to c1320 which by my reckoning is some 75% short of double as is the 1370 level already mentioned which is c30% and still 70% short of double.. See if your friend agrees.

I am working on 10,000 psi being a pokey shell, 19,870 is double that equal to 1370 BAR. Are you saying something different or what? As most published data is American and they seem to like metric and PSI I don't get why if we want numbers we just don't all stick to that or a simple a,b.c class

 

Anyhow I shoot two s/s magnums in 12 and 10ga, both were built before steel yet both are put to good use with Pokey steel (yes sorry no atmospheric pressure). I do believe in no more than 1/2 choke as steel patterns far tighter anyway, shooting full if it is safe or not is just too much choke IMO

[wymberley]

I am working on 10,000 psi being a pokey shell, 19,870 is double that equal to 1370 BAR. Are you saying something different or what? As most published data is American and they seem to like metric and PSI I don't get why if we want numbers we just don't all stick to that or a simple a,b.c class

 

Anyhow I shoot two s/s magnums in 12 and 10ga, both were built before steel yet both are put to good use with Pokey steel (yes sorry no atmospheric pressure). I do believe in no more than 1/2 choke as steel patterns far tighter anyway, shooting full if it is safe or not is just too much choke IMO

Yep, agree, your psi figure is near the top end for a standard steel cartridge and the proof for that is just c13,485 psi. Yep, agree, I don't care what we use as long as planet wide we all use the same.

 

Purely out of interest and nothing to do with this specifically, could I ask what are the chamber lengths and either the proof marks should there be no written figures (dependent upon country of manufacture) or the proof figures and the measurement system used (load weight, kg/cm2, bar, etc) on your magnum 12 bore. Many thanks.

[Tedward]

Still no reply from BASC - must be busy!

cheers, Tedward.

[kent]

Yep, agree, your psi figure is near the top end for a standard steel cartridge and the proof for that is just c13,485 psi. Yep, agree, I don't care what we use as long as planet wide we all use the same.

 

Purely out of interest and nothing to do with this specifically, could I ask what are the chamber lengths and either the proof marks should there be no written figures (dependent upon country of manufacture) or the proof figures and the measurement system used (load weight, kg/cm2, bar, etc) on your magnum 12 bore. Many thanks.

Its a 3" chamber, just looked 1000 kp /cm2 is also marked ( think KP stands for kg pressure?). So I guess its 300-400 short of this new pressure test (remembering that it never existed then, to the best of my limited knowledge)I doubt it could have been stamped more? The Bit many miss is condition of the gun now, not when it was proofed ( or rather stamped because I know of instances were batch stamping might have occurred at proof house inc. a loose rifle barrel on one new Remington Rifle). My 10 ga of the same make is marked up 1200 kg, yet I know of many of this make were bored out to 8 ga by a local smith and passed proof again after metal was removed, so I think it safe to assume they were good for more. Is there even a 10ga improved steel proof? as one gunsmith told me none existed (never confirmed that though)

[Tedward]

BASC replied today stating they could not help directly, but attached some Italian proof house info stating that the proof symbol

"PSF with two stars above" was introduced in November 1962 for chambers over 70mm and the proof pressure was 17,637 psi.

This converts to 1216 bar.

If this is the working pressure and not the proof pressure, I'm good to go!

Ascertaining this is proving difficult however, - more research required,

cheers, Tedward.

[Tedward]

Extract from the CIP website:

 

12bore, 76mm chamber, max average pressure 1050bar, maximum statistical individual pressure 1200bar, mean proof pressure 1320bar

 

Question is, was this the standard in 1962 ? - onward and upward!

cheers, Tedward.

[wymberley]

I'm pretty sure that your post #58 is proof pressure and would have been 1200kgs/cm2. Again, I'm pretty sure that your figures at post #59 relate purely to the new HP steel loads. Yet again as I see it, provided the gun is still in proof, then you are good for CIP cartridges marked, "12-76". Therefore, using any HP steel load will be a gamble. I would imagine that the only way to precisely identify the pressure for the two stars/PSF proof marks would be to contact the Italian Proof House.

 

Simply out of interest, back in the day when 1 bar was 14.7 psi, it will be seen that the 17,637 was 1200 on the nose.

Edited September 17, 2013 by wymberley

[Tedward]

Hi wymberley,

don't shoot the messenger! - I was using convertunits.com website for the maths:

 

"How many psi in 1 bar?

The answer is 14.5037738007, assuming you are measuring differential pressure.

Note that rounding errors may occur, so always check your results."

 

way out of my league, - just trying to get a working mans answer to what I thought was a relatively simple but important question:

"Can I safely use 3 inch High Performance Steel cartridges in my half choke 12/76 Magnum proofed Beretta 303?"

cheers, Tedward.

[Guest cookoff013]

Extract from the CIP website:

 

12bore, 76mm chamber, max average pressure 1050bar, maximum statistical individual pressure 1200bar, mean proof pressure 1320bar

 

Question is, was this the standard in 1962 ? - onward and upward!

cheers, Tedward.

 

no it was not the standard then.

[Tedward]

Any chance you could tell me what it was when the Italian Magnum proof was introduced in November 1962?

cheers, Tedward.

[wymberley]

Hi wymberley,

don't shoot the messenger! - I was using convertunits.com website for the maths:

 

"How many psi in 1 bar?

The answer is 14.5037738007, assuming you are measuring differential pressure.

Note that rounding errors may occur, so always check your results."

 

way out of my league, - just trying to get a working mans answer to what I thought was a relatively simple but important question:

"Can I safely use 3 inch High Performance Steel cartridges in my half choke 12/76 Magnum proofed Beretta 303?"

cheers, Tedward.

Yep, you're absolutely correct, c14.5 it is, but back along it was c14.7 That's progress for you - just like Mars Bars - things keep getting smaller!

[Guest cookoff013]

Hi wymberley,

don't shoot the messenger! - I was using convertunits.com website for the maths:

 

"How many psi in 1 bar?

The answer is 14.5037738007, assuming you are measuring differential pressure.

Note that rounding errors may occur, so always check your results."

 

way out of my league, - just trying to get a working mans answer to what I thought was a relatively simple but important question:

"Can I safely use 3 inch High Performance Steel cartridges in my half choke 12/76 Magnum proofed Beretta 303?"

cheers, Tedward.

 

i wouldnt use HP cartridges. have you guys seen any HP cartridges for sale, apart from eley?

[Tedward]

 

no it was not the standard then.

 

Hi cookoff,

I refer the honourable member to post no.63. - Can you tell what was the actual standard for "PSF under two stars" when introduced in 1962? (if, as you say, it differed from today's standard)

And Eley Lightening would be fine, when I find some locally,

cheers, Tedward.

[motty]

 

i wouldnt use HP cartridges. have you guys seen any HP cartridges for sale, apart from eley?

I have some Gamebore mammoth 3" and 3 1/2" and some Gamebore Super steel 2 3/4" that have 'High performance steel' written on the box.

Edited September 17, 2013 by motty

[wymberley]

We have members admitting that they are confused.

 

And it's hardly surprising.

 

We have 'Standard' steel and 'HP' steel which is bad enough but now we Have 'Ultra HP' steel according to Eley. Eley need a slap on the wrist and should be made to withdraw the product - never mind because of over-pressurisation issues - but because advertising standards. A product cannot be described as 'Ultra HP if it shares the same pressure restrictions as 'HP' under the CIP terms. This advertising ploy does nothing but confuse an existing difficult situation even more.

[motty]

We have members admitting that they are confused.

 

And it's hardly surprising.

 

We have 'Standard' steel and 'HP' steel which is bad enough but now we Have 'Ultra HP' steel according to Eley. Eley need a slap on the wrist and should be made to withdraw the product - never mind because of over-pressurisation issues - but because advertising standards. A product cannot be described as 'Ultra HP if it shares the same pressure restrictions as 'HP' under the CIP terms. This advertising ploy does nothing but confuse an existing difficult situation even more.

That might be true, but if people buy a gun that is known to be fit for the job (ie a proper wildfowling auto), then all the guesswork goes away.

[Tedward]

Hi motty,

are you saying only fleur-de-lys stamped semi-autos are "proper" guns for wildfowling ?

- because that leaves an awful lot out in the cold,

cheers, Tedward.

[motty]

Hi motty,

are you saying only fleur-de-lys stamped semi-autos are "proper" guns for wildfowling ?

- because that leaves an awful lot out in the cold,

cheers, Tedward.

All i was saying was, that to cut out any confusion, buying a modern 3 1/2" semi is a sensible idea. That way, any shell can be used without any nagging doubts.

[wymberley]

I think Motty is joking - after all, he's already said that he's used HP classed steel through his not steel proofed gun. I think what I've said is true. The makers are getting ready just in case and are setting out their wares. Should the LAG go against us, then there will be a massive demand for the cheapest option when the effect of the legislation finally filters down to the sport's grass roots - we shooters.

 

Have a read what David BASC has said in an earlier post on this thread and then look at the specifications for the three 12 bore steel loads that Gamebore advertise on t' 'net. According to BASC and CIP all three qualify as HP loads and would therefore require the fleur de lis stamp. Now, I don't know if that is correct, but it is what the 'authorities' are telling me. Personally, I don't care, if the worst does happen and by the time it kicks in I'll be ready to revert to some more sedate fly thrashing. Unless someone gets the situation sorted before this happens, I'll be leaving a muddle of momentous proportions and it is perfectly conceivable that someone is going to get hurt.

[motty]

I think Motty is joking - after all, he's already said that he's used HP classed steel through his not steel proofed gun. I think what I've said is true. The makers are getting ready just in case and are setting out their wares. Should the LAG go against us, then there will be a massive demand for the cheapest option when the effect of the legislation finally filters down to the sport's grass roots - we shooters.

 

Have a read what David BASC has said in an earlier post on this thread and then look at the specifications for the three 12 bore steel loads that Gamebore advertise on t' 'net. According to BASC and CIP all three qualify as HP loads and would therefore require the fleur de lis stamp. Now, I don't know if that is correct, but it is what the 'authorities' are telling me. Personally, I don't care, if the worst does happen and by the time it kicks in I'll be ready to revert to some more sedate fly thrashing. Unless someone gets the situation sorted before this happens, I'll be leaving a muddle of momentous proportions and it is perfectly conceivable that someone is going to get hurt.

No, i wasn't joking. I have used 'HP steel' through my 3" magnum Beretta silver pigeon 4. They didn't hurt the gun or me.I was advised by a local gunsmith to use the shells in that gun. I now use a Beretta Xtrema which i know i can feed any cartridges of the 12g variety.

[wymberley]

No, i wasn't joking. I have used 'HP steel' through my 3" magnum Beretta silver pigeon 4. They didn't hurt the gun or me.I was advised by a local gunsmith to use the shells in that gun. I now use a Beretta Xtrema which i know i can feed any cartridges of the 12g variety.

Yep, an experienced shooter with a modern gun taking a calculated risk based on professional advice.

 

Possible/probable scenario question: What happens when some good old boy tries it with his grandfather's old BLNE proofed for 11/8 oz?

 

A certain amount of confusion would be avoided if advertisers were prohibited from using any descriptions (high performance, high power, HP, etc, etc) which could be confused with the CIP HP rating unless that is what they actually are.

[Tedward]

Hey motty,

I hear what you say, - best answer so far!

I too shall make an informed decision based on the evidence provided, and accept the responsibility for my own actions.

That should keep the lower deck lawyers happy !

cheers, Tedward.