Here's A Thought

[wymberley]

See the comparison chart thread above.

We have the builders in and the place is a tip. For a couple of days while eating I've been looking at what used to be called a gallon of water parked up on the dining table. Now, of course, it is 4&1/2 litres - in 6 75cl plastic bottles. Something is different and it's taken a day with various differing worded questions on Google to sort it. It's the 'e' that got me -  as in 'cle'. It seems it means, 'approximate' and possibly in line with EU regulations for the permitted approximation limits. We know from the comments on the above thread that there is some degree of dissatisfaction with the accuracy of the advertised cartridge shot sizes. In view of this is there not now a prima facie case that the loaders should come within this legislation?

[udderlyoffroad]

Leaving aside for a moment the following issues:
•    Whether Weights and Measures (Packaged Goods) Regulations 2006 applies to shotgun cartridges
•    The fact the regs seem to be more interested in overall mass or volume and not the mass or volume of an individual component(the shot)
•    The fact the ‘e’ mark is voluntary since 01/01/21

I think you have a more fundamental issue:  There is no written standard for what constitutes shot sizes, and even if there were, standards conformance is entirely voluntary unless specifically legislated for.  The Eley diary does not constitute a standard.

So, given the above, I think your case is...shaky at best.

The above is based on approximately 30 seconds’ worth of googling, so I may very well be wrong.

I'd also add that I can see no CE or UK CA marking on any of my boxes of cartridges anyway, leading me to suspect that there's no European legislation that shotgun cartridges have to conform to in order to be sold, short of the CIP requirements.

[wymberley]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Leaving aside for a moment the following issues:
•    Whether Weights and Measures (Packaged Goods) Regulations 2006 applies to shotgun cartridges
•    The fact the regs seem to be more interested in overall mass or volume and not the mass or volume of an individual component(the shot)
•    The fact the ‘e’ mark is voluntary since 01/01/21

I think you have a more fundamental issue:  There is no written standard for what constitutes shot sizes, and even if there were, standards conformance is entirely voluntary unless specifically legislated for.  The Eley diary does not constitute a standard.

So, given the above, I think your case is...shaky at best.

The above is based on approximately 30 seconds’ worth of googling, so I may very well be wrong.

I'd also add that I can see no CE or UK CA marking on any of my boxes of cartridges anyway, leading me to suspect that there's no European legislation that shotgun cartridges have to conform to in order to be sold, short of the CIP requirements.

I don't KNOW but suspect that you're right in what you say. The legislation - or lack of it - suits the loaders so they're not going to be in too much of a hurry to have it changed.

I have 2 lots of the same cartridges the only difference supposedly being the load weight. The loaders deem it acceptable to have 374 pellets per ounce in one and 334 in the other. In reality this is a bad example as I make use of this, one being suited to one gun and the other in a different one. However, this is an exception for a situation which could well cause problems for an unwary shooter with just one gun. As it happens, just this minute another order having the same load weight but a different shot size has been delivered.

Just as the loaders won't be in a hurry to improve matters, we don't have the initiative to attempt to do so in spite of the fact that as prices will rise and as we won't to pay any more the product quality will drop and the situation will get worse. 

Right, lets see what we have now. 

 

EDIT: Spot on. Pleased, as I am responsible for the maker introducing this load after I'd placed a special order for them which they previously did not make.

Edited April 29, 2022 by wymberley