.410 platic vs fibre wad pressures?

[bud84]

Hi all, i have recently got hold of the Small Bore Manual from Ballistic Products. It is packed with load data for the .410 but all the loads seem to use a plastic wad. I like to use a fibre wad and a couple of places i shoot require them. My question is, can fibre wads be used in place of plastic or will this be dangerous? I have tried looking up on other forums but have found quite conflicting views on the subject. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance

[Walker570]

Give John a call at Folkstone Engineering. I have just purchased powder/wads/cards from him with a list of loading suggestions. Loaded some this last week and went out Thursday to give them a try. Awesome result. The first three pigeons came in intending to pass at speed and were 30yrds give or take a yard or two. Folded them in a puff of feathers. I am doing a final crimp with the GAEP spinner and although it does give a nice finish I think it may be 'tightening' the crimp too much because the ends of the cartridge cases are being blown off, similar to some RC and Eley factory loads I have used. Going to load a box without using the spinner to check.

John is a great guy to deal with and very helpful. This was my first purchase from him.

[bud84]

Thanks for the reply. I have been to see him actually and do use one of his loads. I wanted to try some others just as a comparison really. I use a star crimp and have the same issue as you, the cases are not reloadable unless i cut them down to 2.5". I was told using a roll crimp would stop this, obviously not. I want to shoot a lot more .410 so would like a few different loads to try.

[Stonepark]

In the loads I have for 410, normally the powder is dropped by 1gr or thereabouts when moving from fibre to plastic.

[bud84]

So in theory going from plastic to fibre should be ok?

[lancer425]

Yes

[Walker570]

A roll crimp might just solve the case separation problem. The RCs were plastic wad factory and 99% of those I shot lost a third of the case. Had a few Eley given me which did the same but on examination the cases looked identical so thought it was the case, but I am now getting the same with Fiocchi cases. That plastic flying out must disrupt the pattern.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Walker570

[sterling]

So in theory going from plastic to fibre should be ok?

 

I've read through a lot of .410 data and I've never seen pressures/velocities using felt, fibre or cork wads matching pressures obtained using plastic wads. I personally go out on a limb and use any like-for-like (2.5" or 3" and corresponding shot load) plastic data with fibre wads, I just steer clear of hot primers like CCI 209M and stick with medium types like Fiocchi 615's. I've got clay & game's .410 cork wad data somewhere around here if you want it?

[bud84]

Thanks for the replies. I emailed Ballistic Products with this question, here is their reply

 

Good morning Paul,

It is definitely NOT recommended to swap a fibre wad in for a plastic wad. The two styles will generate drastically different pressures. The .410 uses very slow burn rate propellants. Without the obturation provided by a plastic wad, it is very difficult to achieve combustion and generate the necessary pressures to avoid squib loads in the .410. This is not a loading application that we provide data for.

Doing this seems to get very different views, i guess ballistic products are erring on the side of caution to cover themselves? Does anyone know how much it costs to get a load sent off and tested?

Edited August 14, 2017 by bud84

[Stonepark]

Thanks for the replies. I emailed Ballistic Products with this question, here is their reply

Good morning Paul,

It is definitely NOT recommended to swap a fibre wad in for a plastic wad. The two styles will generate drastically different pressures. The .410 uses very slow burn rate propellants. Without the obturation provided by a plastic wad, it is very difficult to achieve combustion and generate the necessary pressures to avoid squib loads in the .410. This is not a loading application that we provide data for.

Doing this seems to get very different views, i guess ballistic products are erring on the side of caution to cover themselves? Does anyone know how much it costs to get a load sent off and tested?

Over powder card acts as the seal and the ones from f. esken. t provide a tight seal i. e. Will trap air in the cartridge case, which some times requires seating several times to expunge the air and seat properly.

 

BP are an American firm and both they and American shooters tend to have little if any experience with fibre and they also tend to use hotter loads than we do.

 

 

As to costs for testing, last time it was £60 for a test of 10 cartridges.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Stonepark

[Uilleachan]

Yep, the BP small bore manual is good. However as mentioned by Stonepark above, these are hot US style loads in the main, some are quite interesting loads that reflect the current US trend to lighter faster loads. The US spec for .410s' is also a little more robust when it comes to handling pressures.

 

Generally fibre loads have a bit more friction to them as the shot column is in contact with the tube wall all the way to and through the choke. Long cup type plastic wads contain most of the shot during the journey up the barrel and therefore, generally, there's less friction involved. Swapping plastic for fibre in that scenario, especially with the hotter loads contained in the BP small bore manual is not to be recommended, IMVHO of course.

[Guest cookoff013]

Over powder card acts as the seal and the ones from f. esken. t provide a tight seal i. e. Will trap air in the cartridge case, which some times requires seating several times to expunge the air and seat properly.

 

BP are an American firm and both they and American shooters tend to have little if any experience with fibre and they also tend to use hotter loads than we do.

 

 

As to costs for testing, last time it was £60 for a test of 10 cartridges.

 

the fibre wad fireforms in the chamber, upon firing it squishes the fibre wad to the side of the hulls intern squishing the hull to the chamber. what you describe is just a reloading annoyance.

last time i had stuff tested it is £36 for 20 shells. minimum 5 shells of any one type.

[bud84]

Sounds cheap enough to get loads tested then. Why in the USA do they favour these lighter faster loads? What's the advantage? Some very fast loads in the manual, some of them only 9 gram. Is there some way of roughly working out pressures or is it just trial and error?

[Guest cookoff013]

what manual?

[bud84]

Small Bore Manual, Ballistic Products

[neutron619]

Sounds cheap enough to get loads tested then. Why in the USA do they favour these lighter faster loads? What's the advantage? Some very fast loads in the manual, some of them only 9 gram. Is there some way of roughly working out pressures or is it just trial and error?

 

And there was me thinking that that was the English Disease...

[Continental Shooter]

I am doing a final crimp with the GAEP spinner and although it does give a nice finish I think it may be 'tightening' the crimp too much because the ends of the cartridge cases are being blown off, similar to some RC and Eley factory loads I have used.

 

 

This is a sign of either over pressure or poor quality shell; but giving the fact you're crimping with a spinner, then the latter seems more appropriate.

 

What height closure is suggested in John's load?

 

Bear in mind that every time you crimp the shell 1 mm lower, you add 100 bar!! So, if the shell was supposed to be closed at 66 mm (i assume you use 3.5") and you close it at 64, that's 200 bar more than the proofed load

 

generally speaking 70 mm cases should be closed at 58-60 mm depending on load requirement; 76 mm cases should not be closed lower than 66 mm (as they are already high in pressure)

[Continental Shooter]

Over powder card acts as the seal

not in a million years!

 

I think is fundamentally wrong to suggest that a piece of cardboard, 1mm thick at best, can retain 5-800 bar pressure...

 

gas sealant provide a sealant as they are designed to be heat resistant and expandable, providing a tight seal where the gas cannot escape from the sides causing an unbalance and turbulence in the pellets column with consequent increase in the spread (hence why they're never used, professionally, in long range cartridges)

 

This is also why, as a general rule (with lots of exceptions), moving from plastic wad to fibre requires an increment of 0.05g of powder: to compensate the loss of pressure caused by the gas escaping from the side (not suggesting anything here).

[Continental Shooter]

Is there some way of roughly working out pressures or is it just trial and error?

 

If you've done 100's of tests and you know the powder and primers well (they often change depending on batches and brands) then you might

 

but it should never been a matter of trial and error

[rbrowning2]

not in a million years!

 

I think is fundamentally wrong to suggest that a piece of cardboard, 1mm thick at best, can retain 5-800 bar pressure... :

Over powder cards are generally 4mm or 3mm thick in 12/20ga or 2mm in .410 it is normally over shot cards that are 1mm.

Some small gauge commercial fibre wad cartridges, .410 I have recovered shot from, do not even have an over powder card at all.

 

Their is a warning on john's suggested loads about to deep crimps.

 

Their s no direct correlation between velocity and pressure.

[bud84]

I have been doing a bit of research and came across these data tables from Gualandi. Most loads have both plastic and fibre wad options, in every load that has the option the powder measure is increased for the fibre load. I have posted a link rather than the tables as it is pages long.

 

http://www.gualandi.it/docs/tabpolv_2013_eng.pdf

[Continental Shooter]

Over powder cards are generally 4mm or 3mm thick in 12/20ga or 2mm in .410 it is normally over shot cards that are 1mm. My bad! thought it meant the overshot card. apologies!

Some small gauge commercial fibre wad cartridges, .410 I have recovered shot from, do not even have an over powder card at all.

 

Their is a warning on john's suggested loads about to deep crimps. Yup, you can see it in the picture what 2mm difference can create;

 

Their s no direct correlation between velocity and pressure.

 

Do you know if John's managed to sort out the delivery problem?

[Continental Shooter]

Yup. although i think 0.1 is excessive; maybe in some dedicated dispersin load but generally 0.05 is more than enough

 

It's funny to note. however, how powders change throughout the year. It's to be said thought that i am a sucker for american powders, and only rate few EU powder as worthwile loading but from the table it's evident to me that:

 

800X

 

20/70 PLASTIC 615/CX MIL 1,40 ==== 30: this load proofed returned 405 m/s & 790 bar; when tested last year

20/70 PLASTIC 615/CX MIL 1,20/1,30 25/26: unti; few years ago the tipical dose was (a)1,10/1,15 x 25 or (b)1,15/1.2 x 26 depending on batches (and it was a bit of a kicker, but good on high pigeons or longer shots). this year, after being bought over by NS, i tested the same and came out (a) 650 bar, 350 m/s & (b) 670 bar and 370 m/s

When i spoke to NS Italia (NSI) they suggested that for my batch i increased the powder load by 3% to bring it in line with previous data.

 

So, personally i would take these dated tabs (2013) with due care for this rason and the fact that factory powder is completely different from retail powder

[Walker570]

This is a sign of either over pressure or poor quality shell; but giving the fact you're crimping with a spinner, then the latter seems more appropriate.

 

What height closure is suggested in John's load?

 

Bear in mind that every time you crimp the shell 1 mm lower, you add 100 bar!! So, if the shell was supposed to be closed at 66 mm (i assume you use 3.5") and you close it at 64, that's 200 bar more than the proofed load

 

generally speaking 70 mm cases should be closed at 58-60 mm depending on load requirement; 76 mm cases should not be closed lower than 66 mm (as they are already high in pressure)

What your saying .. and I don't doubt your advice at all ... is that the RC factory loads I have which are blowing the ends of the shells and some of the Eley as well are all over pressure ? I am understanding that by closure you are referring to the total length of the cartridge when finished OR is that at the point the actual crimp lies. My reloads are 69 and 68 respectfully.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Walker570

[Walker570]

In addition my crimps are fairly shallow barely a mm probably half that and the run over with the spinner mostly smooths the outside edge. I apply very little pressure when doing it. All of my powder loads are individually measured on a scale and the shot is also checked on the scale, every five scoops. The cases are once fired Fiocchi 3 inch.